Defendant shall be punished by a fine of 1.5 million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

[2017 High Court Decision 720]

1. Counterfeiting each private document;

A. A. On September 22, 2016, the Defendant committed a crime at around September 22, 2016 at a telephone store (D) with the Defendant’s hand-on sales store (D) with the Defendant’s operation located in Ansan-si, Dong-si.

The new contract for the SK Telecom Services, using a testing body, stated “E”, “F”, “G”, “E” in the column for the date of birth in the column of “E”, “G”, “E” in the State column, and then forged one copy of the said new contract under the name of E, a private document concerning rights and duties, without authority, for the purpose of exercising the right and duties by signing it on the applicant column.

B. Around May 3, 2017, the Defendant had been kept at the same place as the foregoing paragraph (a) around May 3, 2017.

The application form for the LG Plus subscription, using a testing tool, stated “E”, “G”, “G”, “E”, and “E” in the state column in the column of the customer’s name, and forged one copy of the application form in the name of E, a private document related to rights and obligations, without authority, for the purpose of exercising rights and obligations by signing it on the applicant column.

2. Exercising each relevant fact-finding document;

A. On September 22, 2016, the Defendant submitted to the person in charge of the establishment of a new contract under the name of the E, such as the foregoing 1-A at the same time and at the same place as that of the foregoing 1-A, and submitted to the person in charge of the establishment of a forged contract under the name of the E, such as the foregoing 1-A, as if it were a document duly formed

B. On May 3, 2017, the Defendant submitted to the person in charge of the forgery at the same time and at the same place as that of the foregoing 1-B, and submitted to the person in charge of the opening of LG Plus who is aware of the forgery as if he/she were a document duly formed, such as the foregoing 1-B.

[2017 High 721]

3. On May 18, 2016, the Defendant forging Private Document: (a) opened a cell phone of “J” at the same place as that of the above 1-A around May 18, 2016 at the same time as that of the above 1-A, while opening the cell phone.