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

1. On March 10, 2015, the Defendant forged private document: (a) written “E”, “E”, “E”, “E”, “E”, “E”, “E”, “E” in the business name column; (b) in the address column, “G” in the representative column; and (c) in the address column, “G” in the name of the business entity column; and (b) in the address column. In the address column, the Defendant written “Y apartment 104, 1401, 1401, 1401, 100, 2015, in the name column.

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising, the Defendant forged a standard employment contract under the name of G and J, which is a private document related to rights and obligations.

2. On March 11, 2015, the Defendant’s uttering of the above investigation documents: (a) as if it was a document duly formed by completing a forged standard contract form as seen above with the Changwon District Office civil petition of the 669 Changwon-si, Changwon-si; (b) had the Defendant sent it by registered mail along with the petition of appeal of the instant case, and had the public official in charge of not knowing the forgery receive it on March 13, 2015.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to J police officers;

1. A copy of a standard employment contract forged;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Article 231 of the Criminal Act, Articles 234 and 231 of the same Act concerning the facts constituting an offense (the point of uttering of counterfeited private documents);

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of each 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 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order;