However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On July 11, 2014, the Defendant filed a complaint for violation of the Copyright Act from the representative E of D, due to the fact of reproduction and sale of the sound source, while working as an employee in the “C” located in Suwon-si B, Suwon-si.

At around November 29, 2014, the Defendant: (a) attended the police station investigation and the first team office for economic crimes in Suwon-gu, Seoul-gu, Seoul-do, on December 29, 2014; (b) received an investigation under the F’s name by stealing the F’s personal information; and (c) signed a “F” without authority for the purpose of exercising the person who has made a statement in the suspect interrogation protocol; (d) forged another’s signature with the intent to use the F’s personal information; and (e) issued the said suspect interrogation protocol to G to the police officer in charge of the judicial police who is aware of the forgery, thereby enabling him/her to file it with the investigation record.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes as to a copy of the F suspect examination protocol;

1. Article 239 (1) of the Criminal Act (the point of Article 239 of the Criminal Act on the crime) and Article 239 (2) and Article 239 (1) of the Criminal Act on the crime (the point of exercising the above investigation signature);

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. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act in the suspended sentence is that the defendant appeared in the police as a person subject to the investigation and stolen the F's personal information and forged and used the F's signature. Considering the content of the instant crime, method of committing the crime, etc., the nature of the crime is not good.

However, in light of the fact that the defendant's mistake is recognized and against the defendant, the first offender and the circumstances leading to the crime of this case, etc., and other overall sentencing conditions in the records, such as the defendant's age, sex, occupation, etc., are considered, the sentence is ordered as ordered.