If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

1. On April 16, 2014, the Defendant, without authority, forged two copies of the private documents in the name of D by affixing the Defendant’s unmanned seal to the Defendant’s identification column of each driver of the aforementioned primary driving report and the report on the actual state of his/her primary driving without authority, for the purpose of exercising the right to ask the Defendant to affix his/her signature and seal on the report on the primary driving and the report on the actual state of his/her primary driving.

2. The Defendant, like the above Paragraph 1, submitted a forged master proposal and a written statement on the status of a host driver, to C District security E without knowledge of the circumstances, and exercised the report.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A report on investigation (the reasons why he/she becomes aware);

1. The application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report (for the reasons for entry);

1. Article 231 of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense (the point of each private document) and Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

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 for the detention of a workhouse;

1. It is so decided as per Disposition, taking into account the following facts: although the nature of the crime is inferior in light of the defendant's criminal reasons for sentencing under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, considering the fact that the defendant reflects the crime of this case; the defendant voluntarily surrenders to the investigative agency on the day after the document was forged; and the defendant's crime does not seem to have been punished.