A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight 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

[criminal power] On November 27, 2015, the Defendant appealeded six months of imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. at the Seoul Central District Court on April 29, 2016, and was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years in the same court on June 29, 2016, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on May 10, 2016.

around 11:00 on September 14, 2013, the Defendant lent 30,000 won (AF-S 18-55 F 3.5-6 VR) per day loans to the Defendant, at “E”, the victim D’s car rental business operated by the victim D in Gangnam-gu Seoul, on condition that the Defendant return up to 11:00 on September 20, 2013.

On September 19, 2013, the Defendant: (a) called the said company on the phone and delayed the return date on September 24, 2013; (b) but thereafter, the Defendant did not return the camera and siren leased to the said company on September 24, 2013.

Accordingly, the defendant refused to return 1.3 million won or more of the market value of the victim's own possession and embezzled it.

"2016 Highest 2978"

1. The Defendant forged private document. From April 2013, the Defendant used F’s aid to open a mobile phone in F’s name and used the F’s personal information using the only cell phone in F’s name. The Defendant used the F’s name by stealing the name of F.

On June 3, 2013, the Defendant entered information necessary for opening the cell phone numbers, including F resident registration numbers, in Chapter 2 of the “new service contract” in Seoul, for the purpose of exercising at the SK Telecom Agent located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and entered each “F” in the column of the customer applying for subscription, and forged two copies of the “F” service contract in the name of F.

Around June 4, 2013, the Defendant continuously forged a “new service contract” under the name of F in the same manner at the same place, and forged a “new service contract” under the name of F in the same manner at the same place on July 23, 2013.

The defendant is entitled to exercise.