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

1. On September 26, 2012, the Defendant: (a) presented a copy, etc. of the FX’s resident registration certificate as if he did not have been delegated to open a mobile phone in the name of FX from FX; and (b) had FV, who knew of such fact, enter the FX’s personal information in the customer information column of the SK service new contract and the contract form of the terminal, which was kept in that place; and (c) had FV enter the fX’s personal information in the customer information column of the FX’s customer information; and (d) had the FV enter the fX’s signature in the name of FX.

As a result, the defendant forged three copies of the SK service new contract and the terminal installment contract, which is a private document.

2. The Defendant exercised the aforementioned investigation document by facsimileing as if he were duly formed three copies of the forged SK service new contract and the terminal copy sales contract, respectively, to an employee who could not know the name of the SK Telecom through FV at the above time and place.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol concerning FV;

1. Each police statement of the FX;

1. A complaint (including attached documents) and a petition (including attached documents);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation;

1. Relevant Article 231 of the Criminal Act, Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, the choice of fines, and the choice of fines;

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

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;