except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The defendant has been delegated from around 1989 by C to manage D shop buildings owned by C in Jung-gu, Seoul.

1. The Defendant, under the name of C, intended to file a lawsuit claiming the payment of unpaid rents, etc. against E, a lessee of the above commercial building. On September 2012, the Defendant drafted a litigation delegating letter with the content that he/she delegated the Plaintiff C to the law firm G to his/her attorney at the law firm G office located in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seoul, on his/her name. Using the computer, “C,” “E,” and “C,” and “Seoul-gu, Seoul,” written “B-gu D” and stamped C’s seal attached to his/her name.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a letter of delegation of litigation in the name of C, which is a private document on rights and obligations.

2. Around September 6, 2012, the Defendant: (a) received a complaint from an employee of law firm G who was delegated with litigation as above from the Seoul Central District Court’s civil petition office located in Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu, Seoul Central District Court that received the complaint from a court employee who is not aware of the forgery; and (b) exercised the above submission of the forged petition accompanied by the document as if it were duly constituted.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Each police statement of C and E;

1. A copy of a forged deed of attorney;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the withdrawal of a lawsuit by an complainant;

1. Relevant Articles 231 (Forgery of Private Document), 234, and 231 (Uttering of Private Document) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

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

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the decision of a sentence) of the suspended sentence is the recommended field of Type 1 (the forgery, alteration, etc. of private documents).