The judgment below

The guilty part against Defendant A and D and the guilty part against Defendant T shall be reversed.

Defendant

A.

(d) for the purpose of uttering, forgees 10 copies of the application for accession, which is a private document relating to rights and obligations, as shown in the Schedule of Offenses (iv).

The defendant at the above-mentioned investigative document events shall be above-mentioned around October 3, 2015.

In addition to the forged Q's mobile phone entrance application, the mobile phone in Q was opened in the name of Q, using the forged Q's mobile phone entrance application as described in the attached list of crimes (4).

"2018 Highest 1840"

E. On April 8, 2016, the Defendant forged an application form under the name of S, which is a private document on rights and obligations, with the intention of using the following as “S” on the date of birth: (a) around April 8, 2016, the Defendant used the name of S to keep a copy of his identity card; (b) opened the mobile phone; and (c) asked T, an employee of the said branch, to open the mobile phone; (d) requested T, who is an employee of the said branch, to open the mobile phone; and (e) in the applicant column for U mobile phone subscription, T, who is aware of the fact, forged one copy of the application form under the name of S, which is a private document on rights and obligations, with the intention of using the “S” and “V” in the address column; and (b) made T, who is an employee of the said branch, enter the applicant’s mobile phone in the name of Gangdong-si, Seoul, with the possession of a copy of his identity card under the name of S, and then sold the mobile phone under the name “Y”).

F. 1) The Defendant, as described in the foregoing paragraph (e)(1) around April 8, 2016, has T-be in charge of the name in the name of the corporation I, even though he/she is aware of the application for the admission of forged S mobile phone.