A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months and by a fine of thirty thousand won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine,

Punishment of the crime

1. A theft Defendant: (a) around November 05, 2014, at E offices operated by the victim D in Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on November 1, 2014; (b) inside the office creshed by using a cresh with no one copy of the paper for household check in the name of 5 million Won F, the victim owned by the victim in the middle column of the office Seo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

They go back.

Accordingly, the defendant stolen the victim's property.

2. The Defendant, in violation of the Regulation of Illegal Trees Act, without authority, stated the amount column as “O million, 5,000,000”, “F” and “F” in the issuer column as of the date and time set forth in the foregoing paragraph 1, and at the same time and at the same place, for the purpose of exercising one head of the household check paper in the name of F in the name of the Bank Dobong Dobong issued by the Bank Dobong branch (SC), and stated the amount column as “O million, 5,000,000,000”, “F” and “F” in the issuer column, respectively.

D A seal imprinted with the name of issuer F, which was taken off at the home of D, was affixed.

Accordingly, the Defendant forged the F's household identification card in F name.

3. Around November 05, 2014, the Defendant, at H rice wholesaler located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Gangnam-gu, the Defendant held that, as if he was actually issued, one copy of the forged household check, 5 million won, as described in paragraph (2) above, was de facto published on the basis of a rice purchase price.

In this respect, the Defendant exercised a forged pay-free security.

4. The Defendant purchased rice from the victim I at the date, time, and place as described in the above paragraph 3, and gave the victim a letter of five million won household check in the name of F forged as above.

However, in fact, the above household check was prepared without authority by the defendant, and the defendant did not have an intention or ability to pay the price on the settlement date of the check.

The Defendant received KRW 2827,500,000,000 from the injured party in cash, respectively, in the name of rice and salves equivalent to the market value of KRW 2.1 million.

Accordingly, the defendant was given property to the victim by deceiving the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The defendant;