A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

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.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a staff member in charge of the receipt duties in the department of the council members in the department of the council members in the 15th floor of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C Building.

1. Violation of the Act on Promotion of the Use of Information and Communications Network and Information Protection, Etc. (Violation of Information and Communications Network Act, etc.) and forgery of private documents, on January 17, 2017, the Defendant, at the office of the original department of the foregoing hospital, stamped the e-mail and password of doctor E with the e-mail and password of the e-mail program of the e-mail program at the office of the original department of the foregoing hospital. The Defendant, by inputting the Defendant into the patient, printed out the disease classification mark, “N19 (before the new department),” the name of the prescribed medical person, “E” by type of license, “C’s number,” “F”, the name of prescription drug, “C e-mail-type”, and “420” with the volume of medication, and then put the e-mail

As a result, the Defendant intruded on an electronic medical set program, which is an information and communications network beyond permitted access, and forged a prescription slip in the name of E, which is a private document on proof of facts, for the purpose of exercising the right. From around that time to January 19, 2018, the Defendant invaded on the information and communications network 17 times in total, such as a list of crimes (1) and forged the prescriptions in the name of doctor E, G, and H.

2. On January 17, 2017, the Defendant: (a) presented a forged prescription at the J pharmacy located in Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul, as described in paragraph (1) at the J pharmacy located in Seocho-gu, Seoul, as if he were genuinely issued to K of pharmacist who is aware of the forgery; and (b) exercised forged documents over 17 times in total, such as in the list of crimes in attached Form (1).

3. The Defendant, at the same date, time, and place as described in paragraph 2, presented a prescription as if he/she was lawfully issued by his/her will, and received a prescription of Crats, mercins, Les, or mercins.

However, in fact, the prescription presented by the defendant was forged as stated in paragraph 1.

The defendant is the victim through K, who is aware that the above prescription was forged.