Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

If a fine is not paid, 50,000 won shall be converted into one day.

Punishment of the crime

[2012 high-level 4472] On August 9, 2010, the Defendant concluded that “D’s mobile phone agency operated by Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Victim C” in the “D’s mobile phone agency for the victim C in Jongno-gu, Seoul, would open the mobile phone under the name of Soca E. Scama, which received prior consent.”

However, there was no intention or ability to pay the price even if the mobile phone was opened in the name of Kao (E).

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, was provided with one cell phone (EV-W700) equivalent to 638,000 won from the victim.

[2012 High Court Decision 4473]

1. At around 14:00 on October 19, 201, the Defendant was not authorized to conclude a new contract for mobile phone service from the victim G in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, to enter into a new contract for mobile phone service at the mobile phone retail store.

Nevertheless, for the purpose of exercising the above contract, the defendant, without authority, entered "H and I" in the space of customer information and resident registration number using an authorized color pen on the paper of the new contract for the service of SKT without authority, and entered the name of the defendant in the column of customer name and the customer column for the application for subscription, and entered the defendant's name in the name column of the applicant's name and the defendant's signature next thereto, and formed one copy of the above contract, which is a private document concerning rights and duties, using the defendant's qualification as the agent of the above H, and exercised

2. In fact at the same time and place as in the preceding paragraph, even if the Defendant subscribed to the mobile phone service in the above H name, he/she issued a new contract prepared as if he/she had no intent or ability to pay the mobile phone price, and subscribed to the mobile phone service, and he/she received from the above victim one of SKY mobile phones which is equivalent to the market price of 865,000 won.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant;