No. 1 (Chapter 9 of the Financial Services Commission Documents), No. 3 of the evidence seized.

[2018 Highest 7327] The Defendant, along with the employees of scaming scam scam scam scam scam scam scam scam to the employees of the Financial Supervisory Service by falsely pretending the victim to the investigative agency and withdrawing all of the money within the ncam account to verify whether the victim’s account was involved in an offense.” The Defendant conspired with the Defendant, by presenting the forged documents, etc. under the name of the Chairman of the Financial Services Commission, etc. to the victim and receiving the victim’s signature from the victim, to deliver the victim’s money

1. On October 31, 2018, the Defendant forged public document: (a) around 10:00, the Defendant printed out 21 copies of a “civil petition tracking a financial account” file under the name of the Chairperson of the Financial Services Commission, which was sent to the Defendant’s E account on October 29, 2018, at the Defendant’s friendship office located in Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu, by using a computer and a printer.

In the document form of the Financial Services Commission, the said document was an official document on which the Chairperson of the Financial Services Commission affixes his/her official seal to the public prosecutor and investigator in charge of the Seoul Central District Public Prosecutor's Office in accordance with the main measures and cooperation documents related to tracking the financial account. The Financial Services Commission issued the national security account code pursuant to Article 19 (7) of the Financial Services Commission Act, and issued his/her subordinate financial assets to the original state safely after tracking supervision.

As a result, the Defendant forged a document 21 of “civil petition tracking a financial account” in the name of the Chairperson of the Financial Services Commission, a public document, without authority, for the purpose of exercising the official document in collusion with the employees of scaming.

2. The Defendant is guilty of a private document, at the time and place specified in paragraph 1.