beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The Defendant, “2018 Highest 1203,” was a person who worked as an employee of the agency selling mobile phones in Pyeongtaek-si from October 21, 2016 to January 2018.
1. On February 28, 2017, the Defendant: (a) entered the aforementioned mobile phone sales agency in the column of “E” and “F” column in order to open a mobile phone under the name of E without obtaining the consent of E from the customer by using the PC for business use; (b) entered the application form for mobile phone service in the form of “E” and “E” in the column of date of birth; and (c) entered the electronic signature in the applicant/applicant column; and (d) sent one file of the mobile document in the form of “E” in the form of entering the electronic signature in the column of the applicant/applicant; and (d) connected to the LG pl online network on the same day, sent the said fact to the person in charge of opening the LG plus Co., Ltd. as if the said file was duly formed.
As a result, the Defendant forged and used a mobile service subscription application form in the name of E, an electronic record on rights and duties, - a mobile document file, from that time to December 21, 2017, for the purpose of handling administrative affairs. From that time, the Defendant forged and exercised a mobile service subscription application form, an electronic record on rights and duties, - a mobile document file, for the purpose of making the same handling affairs over a total of eight occasions, such as the list I of crimes.
2. In fact, even if the Defendant received money from the customers who visited the above agency for the cancellation of subscription to the mobile phone under his/her name, he/she thought to use it as money for gambling, etc., and did not intend to normally terminate subscription to the mobile phone, even though he/she did not intend to do so, the Defendant was the victim G who visited the agency with a view to cancelling the mobile phone around June 2017.