A. misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles made a number plate using the Defendant’s vehicle number as it is, and the above number plate does not reach the degree to which it is impossible to distinguish the true vehicle number plate from the body of ordinary people. Thus, the Defendant’s act does not constitute the crime of forging air and the crime of uttering of forged air defense.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous in misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of suspended sentence for four months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The crime of forgery of air defense and the crime of uttering of forged air defense against the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is a crime punished to protect the public trust in respect of the authenticity of public marks, and as long as the vehicle number plates, which are air defense, are manufactured at will and forged and used, each of the above crimes is established regardless of whether the vehicle number was the number of the vehicle actually owned by the defendant.

In this context, forgery is required to mislead the general public as it is true air, and if the appearance of the vehicle number plate of this case produced by the defendant is considered to have reached the degree of general public to mislead the general public.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. The instant crime on the assertion of unfair sentencing is deemed to have been committed by the Defendant by forging a vehicle number plate kept in custody in the competent authority on tax in arrears without being returned to the competent authority through lawful procedures and by operating a vehicle, and the nature of the relevant crime is not good. In full view of all the circumstances, including the Defendant’s age, character and behavior, environment, developments and details leading to the instant crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the sentence of the lower court is too excessive.