All judgment of the court below shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and six months.

1. On the other hand, the prosecutor asserts that the defendant's punishment (one and half years of imprisonment with prison labor, and four months of imprisonment with prison labor) of the lower court (the first instance court, the second instance court, and the second instance court) is too unreasonable, while the prosecutor asserts that the defendant is too unfied and unfair.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the prosecutor ex officio, this Court decided to concurrently examine the appeal cases against the lower judgment. Each of the lower judgment against the Defendant is in a concurrent crime relationship under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and a single sentence should be imposed within the term of punishment increased by concurrent crimes in accordance with Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the lower judgment cannot be maintained.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court below is reversed ex officio pursuant to Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the above ex officio grounds for reversal, and the following is again decided after pleading.

Criminal facts

The summary of the facts charged and the summary of the evidence admitted by the court are as shown in each corresponding column of the judgment below, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Article 231 of the Criminal Act (the point of each private document Article 231), Articles 234 and 231 (the point of exercise of each of the above investigation documents), Article 347 (1) (the point of fraud) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment for each of the following crimes;

1. There is no history of criminal punishment exceeding a fine, for the reason of sentencing under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the same Act.

On the other hand, the defendant uses personal information, etc. of customers who came to know in the course of operating a mobile phone agency, and received a mobile phone from a communications company or received a communication service from the communications company by repeatedly forging and using the application form, etc.