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

1. On January 2013, the Defendant: (a) stated that he/she holds a driver’s license owned by the victim when he/she sells cargo under the name of the victim C; (b) stated that he/she was granted a license from the victim to open the Internet and TV under the name of the victim; (c) stated that he/she applied for the Internet and TV in the name of the victim despite the fact that he/she had not been allowed by the victim to open the Internet and TV; and (d) called the E Office’s staff member F in charge of receipt of the E Office located in Gunsan City D around October 13, 2014 to the Defendant as C; and (c) stated the said F in the “ Goods Selection” column as “C”, “resident registration number” column, “G,” “H” column, “public address” “H” column, and “C” column as “the name of the applicant” and “C” column.

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising, the Defendant forged a copy of the application for Soleh Hme in the name of C, which is a private document on rights and obligations.

2. The Defendant, at the time, and at the place specified in Paragraph 1, exercised the aforementioned F’s event by having an employee in the name misstatement of the KTz in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, who was unaware of the forgery, deliver the forged C’s name as if the document was duly formed.

3. The defrauded did not permit the opening and use of the Internet and TV in the name of the nominal owner C at the time and place specified in Paragraph 1. However, when the Defendant calls to E employee F, a collaborative company applying for receipt of the Internet, etc. of KT Co., Ltd., which is the victim, to use the Internet and TV, the Defendant applied for the opening of the Internet and TV in the name of the Defendant, as if the Defendant was C, and the said F applied for the opening of the Internet and TV in the name of the Defendant, and made the said application to the non-indicted in charge of the name of the victim KT owner.