The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The summary of the reasons for appeal is unreasonable because the punishment (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and one hundred and sixty hours of community service) of the original judgment is too unreasonable; and

2. Examination of the reasoning for appeal ex officio prior to the judgment on the ground for appeal ex officio: (a) where multiple forged private documents are used in a lump sum because one act constitutes multiple crimes and constitutes a regular concurrent relationship as prescribed by Article 40 of the Criminal Act. From October 13, 2012, around October 25, 2012, a new service contract under the name of D, a contract for installment sale of a device, a written consent for collection and use of personal location information, a crime using a written consent for collection and use of personal location information in a lump sum; (b) new service contract under the name of S, a new contract for installment sale of a device, a written consent for collection and use of personal location information, a written consent for the purchase and use of personal location information, a written consent for collection and use of personal location information, and a written consent for subscription for a fee reduction system should be deemed to be a single act; (c) a new service contract under the name of P, a written consent for the use of personal location information; and (d) a written consent for the use of personal location information;

However, the court below erred in dealing with each of the above crimes as concurrent crimes, and misunderstanding the legal principles on the relation of acceptance of such crimes affected the judgment. Therefore, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more in this regard.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, without examining the defendant's above assertion of unfair sentencing, on the grounds of ex officio reversal.