The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant: (a) performed contractual tasks with F; (b) performed the work of entering into a contract with F;

In accordance with the E’s explanation, the Defendant did not have any intention to use the document for the alteration or alteration of the private document.

B. The Defendant attempted to commit fraud is merely a victim F to apply for a payment order due to failure to return the credit card POS equipment from the victim F, and there was no intention to obtain fraud.

2. Determination

A. As to the use of a private document, the Defendant also argued to the same effect as the above grounds for appeal, and the lower court, taking account of the circumstances as stated in its reasoning, even though there was no evidence to verify the number of agreements, the Defendant did not confirm the intention of F as the party to the contract, and only supplemented the instant use contract without confirming the number of agreements, thereby recognizing the Defendant’s intent to alter the private document.

We rejected the Defendant’s assertion.

In addition to the circumstances revealed by the court below, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, namely, the defendant, at the time of the investigation by the police, stated 1,00 items of the agreed number at 1,00 items.

Although the statement was made (one right 42 pages of investigation records), the prosecutor stated to the effect that he had ordered E to have an agreement number of 1,000 cases (1 right 1 right 138 pages of investigation records), the contents that the defendant ordered E as well as the contents that he received instructions from E are mixed (25,26,31 side of investigation records), the defendant's statement as to how to supplement the number of agreements was reversed and the credibility of the defendant's statement as to the reasons to supplement the number of agreements was reduced. On the other hand, the second credit card POS machine was consistently provided to E without compensation.

A statement is made, and credibility is recognized as well as the statement of the use contract of this case.