The defendant is a representative of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Cultural Heritage Development Association B.

On February 27, 2012, the Defendant sent a “request for withholding the conclusion of a construction contract” document to the effect that the head of the partnership D is asked to withhold the conclusion of the construction contract because he/she is under investigation on suspicion of corruption in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul. The Defendant, without authority, stated the above document as “representative A” and signed it as if he/she was a representative without authority for the purpose of exercising despite being merely one of the representatives of the above association, and exercised the above document by allowing members E to send the document with qualification as above as if it was duly formed.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Prosecutions and police interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. “Treatment Construction Representative Director” thickness

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on supplementary documents;

1. Relevant Article 232 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Article 232 of the Criminal Act, Articles 234 and 232 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of fines, respectively;

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

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act (one day: 50,000 won) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act (the postponement of sentence: fine of a fine of 500,000 won; fine of a fine of 500,000 won; the defendant does not have any specific penal power; circumstances to be considered in the course of the crime in this case; the elderly; the defendant's occupation, behavior, family environment, etc.