beta
Text
Defendant
A Imprisonment for one year, and each of the defendants B shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.
However, this decision is delivered to the Defendants.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
1. Defendant A
A. Partial revision of criminal facts was made to the extent that there is no substantial disadvantage to the Defendant’s exercise of the right to defense against fraud.
On October 2017, the Defendant prepared an application for entry, etc. by a mobile phone in the name of E in the name of E, and submitted it to the computer network of the victim F corporation.
However, in fact, the defendant only intended to acquire profits by selling an opened mobile phone device, and did not have the intention or ability to pay the opened mobile phone fee to the victim company.
Ultimately, the Defendant, as seen above, by deceiving the victim company, obtained from the victim company the issuance of one G mobile phone equivalent to KRW 1,152,800 at the market price from the victim company, and acquired it by deception, and received from the victims 20 mobile phones equivalent to KRW 29,167,60 at a total amount of 20 times from March 4, 2019, from the victims to March 4, 2019.
B. Around February 2, 2018, the Defendant was holding the private document forgery and the event of the above investigation document even though he did not obtain consent from H to the mobile phone entry in D as described in the above paragraph (a).
H arbitrarily entered personal information of the victim in the name of the victim of a private document, such as “new service contract,” which is a document related to the application for entry, using his/her driver’s license, and forged documents related to the application for entry with the intent of arbitrarily recording the name and signature of H, and used forged documents related to the application for entry, and submitted them to the F Computer System to use the forged “new service contract,” etc.,” and used the forged document at least five times from January 8, 2019.
(c)
The defendant of occupational embezzlement is an employee from September 1, 2015 to D of the victim I's operation.