However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

On August 31, 2015, the Defendant entered into a contract to receive a subcontract for a new C construction work in Si-Sari-si B from Si-Sari-si Co., Ltd. and re-subcontracted it to many companies by process.

On March 2016, the Defendant received a request from E to receive a direct payment consent from E so that he/she may directly receive the attempted construction cost from D, which he/she subcontracted the part of the installation works for air conditioners in the middle of 2016, and without obtaining consent from E, transferred to F, the total amount of 2,1560,000 won the right to claim construction cost, which was prepared in advance in D, to F, the ordering owner of the E subcontractor, without obtaining consent from E.

“The” stated the purport of “H” as the name of the E’s representative in the form of the direct and unpaid written consent form, and issued D related persons as if the document was duly formed, after affixing the E’s seal impression prepared in advance on the next page.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a letter of non-performance in the name of E, a private document related to rights and obligations, and used a forged letter of non-performance.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made to I on the preparation of a letter of apology;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a complaint, written consent for direct payment, written consent, written subcontract, and written statement of payment of construction expenses;

1. Relevant Article 231 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime (the occupation of Article 231 of the Private Document), and Article 234 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for each of the following reasons:

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

1. The reason for the sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the conditions favorable to the reasons for the sentencing as set forth below) of the suspended sentence [the scope of the recommendation] [the scope of the recommendation]] There is no basic area (6 months to 2 years) (the fabrication, alteration, etc. of private documents) [the person who is subject to special sentencing] [the decision of sentencing] unfavorable to the victim (the decision of sentencing] - there is no particular effort to compensate for the economic loss of the victim.