logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2016.11.09 2016고단975
사문서위조등
Text

The sentence against the accused shall be determined by one year and six months of imprisonment.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

The defendant operated a mobile phone agent with the trade name of No. 104 of the J building in Gwangju Northern-gu.

1. On June 30, 2015, the Defendant: (a) stated, “E, resident registration number AF, address North-gu AGPT 102/1204; (b) new bank AHH in the method of payment of fees” in the customer information column for which the Defendant applied for a new mobile phone service contract via the pen; (c) forged one copy of the mobile phone service contract under the name of AE, a private document concerning rights and duties without authority for the purpose of exercising rights and duties, by entering it in the applicant customer column and signing it in the customer column; and (d) forged one cell phone service new contract under the name of the victims or alteration of the mobile phone service contract in the name of the victims, as described in the attached list of crimes (a suspect's forgery of private documents and the use of the aforementioned investigation documents) at the above time and at the above time, he/she was issued as if he/she had completed the forged mobile phone service new contract under the name of the victims, as described in the attached Table 11.

2. On January 20, 2015, the Defendant forged a private document: (a) drafted an application for the purchase of alleh Mobbbbble in the name of AJ in the foregoing C, stating “AJ” in the customer name column, “AK” in the resident registration number column, and the address column “AL apartment 104, 1216, 1216, in the resident registration number column; and signed the “AJ” in the application column.

Accordingly, the defendant, without authority, forged a written application for joining a mobile phone under the AJ's name, which is a private document concerning rights and obligations.

(2) The Defendant’s uttering of the above investigation document was duly formed one copy of the new mobile phone service contract, as seen above, at H’s staff, who was an KTcom agent, and whose name was unknown at the same time and at the same place, and whose name was unknown.

arrow