However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The Defendant forged a public document at the street near the Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government office in order to maintain the registration number of a motor vehicle indicated in the motor vehicle registration number column of the “national meritorious interest sign and a motor vehicle sign” which has already been invalidated, and entered the “B” of the motor vehicle registration number of the motor vehicle owned by the Defendant using a private pen on the spot.

Accordingly, the Defendant forged a “national meritorious interest mark and automobile mark” in the name of the Minister of Patriots and Veterans Affairs, which is an official document.

2. On September 27, 2019, the Defendant: (a) around 13:21 on September 27, 2019, kept the forged “national meritorious interest mark” in the parking zone for disabled persons in Seongbuk-gu Seoul apartment commercial building; and (b) held the forged “national meritorious interest mark” in the front of the said low-est car, as if it were issued genuinely.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Investigation report (including attached documents) on requests for investigation cooperation (related to parking signs for disabled persons) (the timing of use of the motor vehicle sign used for the purpose of this case and confirmation of the effective period);

1. Application of the front and rear Acts and subordinate statutes of the vehicle sign;

1. Article 225 of the Criminal Act, Articles 229 and 225 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

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

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. The Defendant committed the instant crime for his own minor parking convenience under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act. The instant crime is not very good in that it undermines the trust of the general public in society regarding the authenticity of public documents.

However, the records and arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and result of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., are as follows.