When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100.

1. Around July 12, 2013, the Defendant: (a) indicated the “E”, “F”, “F”, “G”, “F”, and “H” in the supplier’s tax invoice form, “760,000 won” in the “tax amount column; (b) the “user fee” in the item column; (c) “8,360,000 won” in the total amount column; and (d) written “8,360,000 won” in the “date of preparation” in the “F,” the supplier’s name, “F,” the name, “H”, and the place of business, which are arbitrarily sealed on the supplier’s name.

Accordingly, the Defendant, for the purpose of uttering, forged a tax invoice in the name of G, which is a private document on rights and obligations, from that time until December 15, 2013, and forged 39 copies of the tax invoice in the name of F representative G, which is a private document on rights and obligations, in total 39 times, from that time by December 15, 2013, respectively.

2. On July 12, 2013, the Defendant at the office of the said D Co., Ltd., the said D Co., Ltd. used the forged tax invoice as if it were a document that had been duly formed, as well as using the falsified tax invoice as if it were a document that had been duly formed. From that time until December 15, 2013, the Defendant used the forged tax invoice on a total of 39 occasions, as indicated in the attached list of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the prosecutor and the police accused;

1. Statement of the police officer G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a complaint, a document submitted by a suspect A (a forged tax invoice 39) to an investigation report (a list No. 2, 9)

1. Relevant Articles 231 and 234 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense. Article 234 (Selection of Fine for Negligence)

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act is forged.