beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
Of the facts charged in the instant case, each private document in the name of C and D is forged and falsified.
Reasons
. Along with the entry of “L” in Daejeon Dong-gu N,******,” customer column, and signed “L” next to the entry, and around that time, he sent the forged L’s above documents to employees under the name of “L, who knew of the forgery, as above, as if they were the document duly formed.”
Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a new contract for SKS service in the name of L, a short term installment contract, and an application for subscription to a fee discount system in the name of L, which is a private document on rights and duties, and used the forged documents.
3. The Defendant, on October 14, 2014, posted a forged or falsified application form, etc. for the purchase of a mobile phone in the name of theO, at H’s around October 14, 2014, and was kept in such place.
The new service contract, a short-term installment trading contract, a price discount contract, the name column for the application form for the subscription to the SK and LGT entered “O” in the name column, “P” in the resident registration number column, “P,**********,” and “O” in the main column, and then signed as “O” in the name side of the name. Around that time, the E “E”, which knows the forgery, sent the forged O’s above documents to an employee under the name of the O as if they were duly formed.
Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged each three copies of a new contract in the name of the O, a private document on rights and obligations, a short term installment transaction contract, and an application for a premium discount system, and exercised the forged documents.
"2015 Highest 7442"
1. On June 9, 2014, at around 19:00 on June 19, 2014, the Defendant was an employee U and a talking employee in the “T” mobile phone operated by the victim S in Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.
I changed the 5S 2 mobile phone, thereby making a false statement.
However, the defendant did not agree with U as above and gave consent.