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 July 20, 2014, the Defendant received 112 reports from around B, etc. on July 20, 2014, and received 112 reports and received a request from the police officer D, etc. to verify his personal information, and thus, the Defendant was likely to be aware that he is out of the water supply due to a fine arrears.

In addition, the Defendant, at around 02:37 on the 21st day of the same month, signed as E at the end of the protocol for the purpose of exercising authority, signed as E without authority to use the case, and presented it to the said G as if the signature was duly formed, at the F Office of the Eunpyeong Police Station, which was located in the 61st day of the Gyeonggi-gu Gyeonggi-gun, G, as the victim of the above violent incident, and continued to conduct the investigation from the slope G as E, and stated the circumstances of the case.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect of the police against E in which the defendant has forged his signature;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to D;

1. Article 239(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense (fixture of a private signature) and Article 239(2) and Article 239(1) of the Criminal Act (fixture of a private signature);

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. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;