1. On December 14, 2012, the Defendant stated that, at the D teahousehouse located in the Dong-gu Gwangju-gu, Gwangju-gu, the Defendant stated that, in the blank promissory note paper, the issuer, the Plaintiff, who was granted a supplementary right from the victim E and received the checks, the Defendant stated that, in excess of the scope of the supplementary right to supplement, the Defendant stated that, in the blank promissory note paper, the Defendant was “one hundred million won,” the face value on the face value column, “one hundred million won,” “the date of issuance,” and “the date of payment, December 14, 2012.”

Accordingly, the Defendant forged the above promissory note, which is a securities, for the purpose of exercising the rights.

2. On December 14, 2012, the Defendant presented a false promissory note as if it were a genuine promissory note to an employee under his name, who is unaware of the circumstances, at the agricultural cooperative 2amba-dong in Gwangju Northern-dong.

Accordingly, the Defendant exercised one of the above promissory notes, which are forged securities.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to copies of promissory notes (Evidence Nos 2 and 6);

1. Article 214 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting the crime (the fact of Article 214 (1) of the Criminal Act), Articles 217 and 214 (1) of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Four months of imprisonment to be suspended;

1. Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act of the suspended sentence (see, e.g., Article 59 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that the defendant has no record of being punished for the same kind of crime, the fact that the defendant has no profit actually acquired, the circumstances of the case and the fact that he