However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The Defendant, as the Republic of China’s Republic of China (hereinafter “China”), is a person who, on April 26, 2004, has acquired the nationality of the Republic of Korea with the actual name “C” and the date of birth “D.,” under the name “E” and “F.”’s personal information, whose date of birth is the “E” and “F.,” forged the registry of the Republic of Korea with the forgery of the registry of the People’s Republic of China’s Republic of China.

On January 19, 2006, the Defendant prepared an application for the issuance of a passport with the personal information above the above permit at the office of Seoul, Guro-gu, Seoul, and submitted it to a public official in charge of issuing a passport who is well aware of the fact to have the above public official enter false facts in the passport by allowing him to issue a Korean passport (H) under the name of “G (E)” who is not a permit. On February 25, 2011, on March 6, 2011, the Defendant used a false passport with the above presentation of a Korean passport to a public official who is not aware of the fact at the port of entry and departure examination at the Incheon International Airport at the time of departure from China and on March 6, 2011.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. An investigation report (a report accompanying documents for an application for nationality of theG, a report on accompanying documents, a new form of the permanent population, an entry or departure record, and a report on accompanying documents for comparison);

1. Copies of each subparagraph, each copy of the passport;

1. Application of each factual inquiry letter and judgment (Seoul Central District Court 2014 High Order 2732, 2015 No. 1093) statute

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act, Articles 229 and 228 (2) of the Criminal Act (a point of exercising a passport entered falsely), and each choice of imprisonment with prison labor;

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. On the grounds of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the conditions favorable to the reasons for sentencing as set forth below), the sentencing conditions indicated in the records of the instant case, including the following circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sex, criminal conduct, family relationship, family environment, motive and means of the commission of the crime, and circumstances after the commission of the crime, shall be determined as set forth in the disposition.

In terms of unfavorable circumstances: China.