The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal asserts that the punishment of the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable, while the prosecutor asserts that the punishment of the court below is too unfasible and unfair.

2. We examine ex officio the determination of unfair sentencing by the defendant and prosecutor.

In the first instance trial, the prosecutor applied for changes in indictment by adding some of the facts charged against the defendant as stated in the following facts, and the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained as the case is changed by this court's permission.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment below is reversed and it is again decided as follows.

【Re-written judgment】 The summary of the facts constituting a crime and evidence admitted by this court is identical to the facts constituting a crime of the judgment of the court below except for the alteration of the facts constituting a crime of the court below as stated in the above 2. B. b. as stated in the corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted as they are in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The changed criminal facts

B. On December 29, 2014, the Defendant entered the mobile phone-related fraud, fabrication of private documents, and the foregoing investigation document-related document-related fraud 1) in the Pelecommunication of a mobile phone seller located in Seo-dong, Seo-dong, Gwangju, Gwangju, on or around December 29, 2014, the Defendant changed the name of the relevant mobile phone (X) by stating “M received” on the mobile phone name change agreement, stating that “M received, legal life-long, O, and address K 10xho-gu, Gwangju, and submitted it to PP by the mobile phone seller who did not know that the contract was forged.”