Upon the introduction of the defendant, E has entered into a partnership agreement with the contents that E will invest 200 million won in (ju)D and will operate a partnership business, and paid 100 million won, but after which E has requested termination of the partnership agreement and return of 100 million won, and the defendant, who became responsible, forged the certificate of borrowing 100 million won in the name of (ju) D representative director B on September 27, 2014.

On November 23, 2016, the Defendant was indicted on charges of forging the above loan certificate, and was tried to forge B’s power of attorney in order to indicate that he had the authority to prepare the loan certificate and to use it as evidence in favor of the trial by expressing that he had the authority to prepare the loan certificate in Busan District Court’s criminal6 Mao (2016 Ma7165).

The Defendant, on March 2017, shall delegate all of the following powers to the mandatory with respect to C, A, and the said mandatory, at the end of not more than Busan but not more than Busan, with the computer D: C, A, and D:

1. Matters concerning the convocation of a general meeting of shareholders and resolutions;

2. Matters concerning the convocation of meetings and resolutions of the board of directors;

3. The matters relating to the operation and management of the company, June 13, 2014, and June 2014, specified as B, and printed out as B, and then affixed B’s seal in its custody and affixed B’s power of attorney, which is not the power of attorney in the name of B.

A chapter was drawn up.

Accordingly, the defendant has forged the power of attorney in B, a private document related to rights and obligations for the purpose of uttering.

(b) Exercising a falsified investigation document;