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

The Defendant, as the managing director of the Company B, obtained the shares from C, a shareholder of the said Company, and required the consent of the other shareholders. As such, the Defendant, as a shareholder of the said Company, intended to forge a document and present it to the said C, as if he consented thereto, with the fact that the said company’s shareholder is holding the seals of D, E, and F.

1. On March 29, 2010, the Defendant: (a) stated that “A transferor shall transfer the shares 24,000 shares of the Bank of Korea (B) and shares 4,590 shares of the Dongyang Transport (P) to a person designated by the transferee (1)(2)(3)(3) and shall receive KRW 300 million; (b) stated the name and resident number and address of D, E, and F in the transferee column, and affix the seal of D, E, and F, which were kept in custody next to the above names.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the defendant has forged a letter of agreement in the name of D, E, and F, a private document concerning rights and obligations without authority.

2. The Defendant, at the time and place stated in the above paragraph (1) above, exercised the forged agreement as if it were a document that was duly formed, with the knowledge of the forgery.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of the agreement;

1. Article 231 of the Criminal Act, Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense (the point of uttering of a falsified investigative document);

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

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. Social service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;