logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.10.22 2015고단3035
위조공문서행사등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On September 22, 2011, the Defendant sentenced the Daegu District Court to imprisonment with prison labor for fraud and one year and two months, and completed the execution of the sentence on July 11, 2012.

1. On May 2, 2013, the Defendant: (a) opened a mobile phone in GA operated by VH in Daegu on May 2, 2013; (b) submitted to the said VH a mobile phone, which was known to the name column, “VI” in the name column, “VJ” in the resident registration number column, and “VJ” in the address column of Jeollabuk-do; and (c) on November 14, 2011, “The Issuing Authorities column” in the issuance date column of Jeollabuk-do.

2. The Defendant forged a private document stating “VI”, “VJ”, and “VL 301 in customer information column by using an irregular pen in the paper of a new contract for mobile phone service at the time and place specified in paragraph (1). The Defendant signed the document by stating “VI” in the petitioner column and various written consents and signing it in the name of the applicant column.

Accordingly, the defendant forged the mobile phone service contract in the name of VI, which is a private document on the rights and obligations for the purpose of uttering.

3. The Defendant, at the time, at the time, and at the place specified in paragraph (1), submitted a forged mobile phone service contract to the above VH by facsimile as if it were a document duly formed.

4. The criminal defendant committed the act as if he/she would pay mobile phone equipment costs and installment charges at the time and place specified in paragraph (1), and submitted a new contract for mobile phone service in the name of VI forged as above to the above VH.

However, the above new contract for the mobile phone service was forged, and the defendant did not have an intention or ability to pay the cost of the mobile phone device and the installment charge.

As such, the Defendant deceivings VH and owns the victim SK Telecom Co., Ltd. on the same day from VH.

arrow