The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Items 1 through 9, 13 through 15, of seized evidence.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal (one year of imprisonment, confiscation) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. As to the instant crime, the act of forging a credit card and deceiving the price by using it as if it was a legitimate credit card should be strictly punished as causing serious harm to the social trust in credit transactions. However, in full view of the fact that the Defendant of Chinese nationality has no criminal records in Korea, the profits acquired from the instant crime appears to have not been significant, the Defendant’s full repayment of the amount of damage was made at the trial, the Defendant’s character and behavior, the environment, the background of the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is somewhat inappropriate.

3. Accordingly, according to the conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

[Discied Judgment] The criminal facts recognized by the court and the summary of the evidence are the same as the entries of each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant Article of facts constituting an offense, Article 70 (1) 1 of the Specialized Credit Finance Business Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 70 (1) 2 of the Specialized Credit Finance Business Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Articles 347 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act, and selection of imprisonment, respectively;

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

1. Article 48 (1) of the Criminal Act of confiscation;