When the defendant does not pay the above fine.

1. From October 2013, the Defendant: (a) had been working as an employee of the C mobile phone store located in Nam-gu, Southern-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu; (b) had the elderly, disabled, etc. who found the said store sign the application form for mobile phone subscription by deceiving customers with no smooth communication, and had them sign the application form for mobile phone subscription; and (c) had them open the cell phone of the said customer by deceiving the communication company, thereby having the said customer gain therefrom.

On December 18, 2014, the Defendant: (a) filed a request for repair of a mobile phone with the victim D, a person other than the door of the Handphone; (b) stated the request for repair of the mobile phone; (c) stated the request for repair of the mobile phone; and (d) stated the request for repair of the mobile phone at that location; (d) stated the request for repair of the mobile phone in the customer column of the application for the mobile phone with the color-proving the victim who thought it as the request for repair of the mobile phone; and (d) made the victim enter “D”, “E”, and “D” in the customer column of the application

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a copy of the original application in the name of D, a private document related to rights and obligations.

2. On December 22, 2014, the Defendant: (a) at the foregoing store, the Defendant: (b) delivered the forged mobile phone entrance application form to a non-employee of the KTT corporation, who was aware of such forgery, by means of cans and sending it to the mail as if the document was a document duly formed.

3. The Defendant, at the same time and time as mentioned in paragraph (2), delivered as if the application form for the purchase of a mobile phone in the name of D, which was forged, was a document that was duly formed, by deceiving the employees of the above communications company, and then by deceiving the employees of the above communications company, he/she received one cell phone of the amount of KRW 962,410 from the victim KT Co., Ltd

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of D in relation to D, and statement of D in relation to the police interrogation protocol for the accused;

1. This mobile subscription application 1.