When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

1. On January 7, 2017, the Defendant: (a) made an application for membership at a discount store located in Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Jung-gu, Incheon; (b) entered “B” in the customer name column, “E” in the contact column, “F” in the contact column, and “F 401 house in Bupyeong-gu, Bupyeong-gu; and (c) entered “B” in the applicant/subscriber column; and (d) signed the application form subsequent thereto.

Accordingly, the defendant forged B's application form for joining mobile phone in the name of B for the purpose of exercising.

2. The Defendant, at the time and place specified in the preceding paragraph, submitted one copy of the application for subscription to a forged mobile phone to the staff H at the said D discount store, as if it were duly formed.

3. The Defendant, at the time and place specified in the preceding paragraph, runs as if he/she was delegated with the authority to open the mobile phone from B, and submitted one application form for opening the forged B mobile phone in the name of B as described in the preceding paragraph to the above H representing the victim’s mobile phone opening business, and acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to the same amount because he/she did not pay the installments and charges equivalent to KRW 1,324,970 after using the opened mobile phone.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against B;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a complaint, an application for subscription (kt mobile), and a detailed statement of claim fees;

1. Relevant Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 347(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of fraud), Article 231 of the Criminal Act (the point of aiding and abetting private documents), Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act (the point of uttering of the above investigation document), and the selection of fines, respectively, for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The fact that the reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act was not fully restored, and the defendant has been punished several times for the same crime.