A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

1. On August 1, 201, the Defendant entered one cell phone (J) in the name of customer E, resident (corporation) number F, address North-gu G, Daegu-gu, Seoul-gu, without authority, for the purpose of exercising within “D” agency located in “D” in the Seocho-gu, Daegu-gu, Seoul-gu, Seoul-gu, without authority, and signed the name following the applicant column, and then did not know the process of preparing the new application by facsimile and then did not pay KRW 848,390,00 in total, including the telephone charges and terminal fees, to the H company I under the name of the victim KT, the Defendant sent the new application by facsimile to the victim KT, and used it until September 30, 2012.

As a result, the Defendant forged a new application in the name of E, which is a private document on rights and obligations, and exercises a forged new application, and thereby, acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 848,390 by deceiving the victim company, from that time to December 2012, the Defendant forged nine copies of a new application for mobile phone entry, such as the list of crimes (1) in attached Table 2012, and exercises each forged application for new entry, and acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 5,770,214 by deceiving the victim company.

2. On August 1, 2011, the Defendant, within the “D” agency located in the Seocho-gu, Daegu-gu, Daegu-gu, Seoul-gu, stated that “No problem should be raised against the victim L by opening his/her cell phone under the four names, and all charges should be paid. After the three-month period, the Defendant made a false statement that “The Defendant shall open his/her cell phone under the four names to the opening of his/her cell phone.”

However, the fact, however, was thought to open the cell phone in the victim L's name and dispose of the cell phone, and there was no intention or ability to pay the telephone rates or the cell phone normally.

As above, the Defendant deceptioned the victim L, opened one unit of “M mobile phone in his/her name,” and used from that time to September 30, 2012, such as the telephone fee and the terminal cost.