If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

The defendant is a person who has served as the Secretary General of the Korean Secretariat, who has its headquarters in the territory of Canada from September 2003 to December 2012.

1. When the Defendant: (a) requested the headquarters to issue a short certificate to a successful applicant of the Korea Scuppression; and (b) received a short certificate from the headquarters from around June 2008, the Defendant was anticipated to withhold the issuance of a short certificate to the successful applicant of the Scuppression that the Defendant requested the headquarters; and (c) around April 2010, the Defendant: (a) was anticipated to refuse to issue a short certificate in the headquarters; (b) around September 2010, F, the Vice Minister of the Korea Secretariat of D, who is aware of the fact in Daejeon, made F, the Vice Minister of Justice of D, enter the name of the applicant G using a computer in advance and affix the seal of D prepared in advance; and (c) around that time, arbitrarily forged one copy of the number of applicants under H in the name of the D president, as indicated in the attached list of crimes.

2. The Defendant exercised the above investigation document as if he were duly formed with 58 applicants for the above-mentioned DaH examination who had forged a certificate under the name of the president of DH around January 1, 200.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of the witness H, F, I, J, and K;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Each trial decision (1379, 208 1380 per 208);

1. Application of statutes on a copy of a forged document;

1. Article 231 of the Criminal Act (the point of Article 231 of the Private Document), Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act (the point of uttering of the above investigation document) and the selection of fines for the crime;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. Although the Defendant asserted the determination on the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order, the Defendant, as the representative of D, an incorporated association in Korea, issued D with H a certificate to the president at the H’s request, the Defendant was determined by H and combustibility.