logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2014.04.23 2014고정111
사기등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

While the Defendant entered into a contract with B, a victimized company, on consignment of telecommunications equipment, prepared an application for subscription to a mobile phone by misappropriation of another person’s name and personal information, and attempted to open the mobile phone and obtain the sales commission from the victimized company.

1. Around December 5, 2011, the Defendant forged private documents at the D office operated by the Defendant located in Daegu Northern-gu, Daegu Northern-gu, stating “E” in the applicant column, “F” in the resident registration number column and the address column, and arbitrarily written E’s signature next to the name of E.

Accordingly, the defendant, for the purpose of uttering, forged the application form for joining the mobile phone in the name of E, a private document on rights and obligations, including the forgery of the application form for joining the mobile phone in the name of E.

2. On December 5, 2011, the Defendant exercised the foregoing investigation document as shown in the annexed sheet of crimes, including: (a) delivering and exercising, as if the document was duly formed, the application for a forged mobile phone accession at the office of the victimized company in the first floor of the Daegu Suwon-gu H building; and (b) exercising, in total, nine times as shown in the annexed sheet of crimes.

3. The Defendant presented nine copies of an application for joining a forged mobile phone at the same time and place as described in paragraph 2. (2) and made a false statement to an employee of the victimized company, as the account holder duly opens and opens the mobile phone at the same time and place.

However, the defendant had the intention to make unjust profits by stealing the name of the defendant, so there was no intention or ability to listen to the opening and opening of the mobile phone to the holder of the title.

Nevertheless, there is a need to do so.

arrow