A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one month.

Punishment of the crime

On November 19, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for four months at the Gwangju District Court for fraud, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on February 27, 2014.

On June 10, 2013, the Defendant: (a) made use of a tamper on the service site of “AL” mobile phone agent operated by the Defendant located in Gwangju Mine-gu, stating “AM”, “N”, and “AO of the Mine-gu,” in the column of customer registration number; and (b) arbitrarily signed on the name and then forged one copy of the service contract under the name of the said AM, which is a private document concerning the rights and obligations; and (c) subsequently, sent a forged new service contract to the SK Telecom Co.,, Ltd., which is aware of the forgery, through a computer system, as if the document was duly formed.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement of the police statement related to AM;

1. Previous records before ruling: Application of inquiry reports, such as criminal records, and criminal investigation reports (attached reports, such as a copy of the judgment);

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

(a) Forgery of private documents: Article 231 of the Criminal Act; Selection of imprisonment;

(b) Uttering of documentary investigation documents: Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act; Selection of imprisonment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the sentencing reasons under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act and the latter concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act are related to the crime of this case, and the motive of the crime, the criminal records of the defendant, and the fact that the defendant is under trial at the appellate court as of the same kind of crime, the punishment against the defendant shall be determined as ordered in consideration of various factors of sentencing