However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. On February 1, 2018, the Defendant of an official document forged the official document by using a certificate of confirmation for G (H) in the name of the actual market in the name of the actual market for E (F) issued by D at the office of the Co., Ltd., Inc., Ltd., located in Jin-si, Jin-si, for the purpose of forging a certificate of confirmation on the use of private-use truck by facsimile, with the fact that D received a certificate of confirmation by facsimile.

Accordingly, on February 6, 2018, the Defendant can can off the identification card using the Defendant’s computer at the aforementioned place, and printed the phrase “GH” in the “4. Model and name of the vehicle” column with covered on the cans of the identification card.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a certificate of confirmation of the use of private-use truck in the name of the Jin market, an official document.

2. On February 7, 2018, the Defendant: (a) submitted to the competent public official I a certificate of confirmation of the report on the use of a truck, which is a forged public document, as described in paragraph (1), at the time of the passage through the Jin-si Viewing Party at the time of Jin-si at the time of Jin-si at KRW 1,00; and (b) exercised the forged public document as if he were issued a true certificate.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made to I by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a written request for an investigation (including documents attached to a forged report on the use of a private-use truck, etc.);

1. Article 225 of the Criminal Act (the point of Article 25 of the Official Document) and Articles 229 and 225 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense (the point of uttering of forged official document);

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 sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act was that there was no significant result in the instant crime for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence, and that there was no previous criminal offender, etc., and other circumstances favorable to or unfavorable to the defendant expressed in the pleadings, such as the defendant’s age, career, health status, and family relation, were comprehensively considered.