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.

The defendant and the victim D are parents of children attending the same school of "2016 Highest 7601".

When the Defendant instructed the obligees to demand repayment of the obligation, the Defendant opened an account in the name of the foregoing D, opened a mobile phone, and received the loan from the lending company using it.

1. Forgery of private documents and the uttering of a falsified investigation document;

A. On July 29, 2016, the Defendant, who had been an insurance solicitor related to an application for opening an account, subscribed to post office insurance to the victim D.

At the same time, they received resident registration certificates from women.

On July 29, 2016, the Defendant entered D’s name and resident registration number in “application form for opening an account” through a verification color pen, and signed “D” in the signature column, in order to open a post office account in the above name D at the post office located in Busan Seo-gu, Busan.

Then, in the same place, the above "application for opening an account" was delivered to F of the above post office staff members F as if they were duly formed.

For the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a letter of application for opening a post office account in the name of D, a private document on rights and obligations, and exercised it.

B. On August 5, 2016, the Defendant entered the name, date of birth, address, and the post office account number, etc. established as stated in the above 1-A, using the verification body, in order to open a mobile phone in the H agency located in Busan H agency G, Busan, and signed the application form for a mobile phone, after entering the name, date of birth, address, and the post office account number, etc. established as stated in the above 1-A in the signature column.

Then, in the form of the forgery, the above "application for accession" was delivered as if it was a document duly formed to the employee of the name-free agency who knew of the forgery.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the defendant is named D, a private document on rights and obligations.