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

The defendant is a person who actually operates E in the following cities: D.

On May 27, 2013, the Defense Acquisition Program Administration entered into a goods supply contract with F on 77 items, such as the parts of independent electric and electronic devices, and F sent Hashes and Berers, which are the parts of consolidated boxes, among the above 77 items.

The Defendant had to submit a test report to the lower court, which is a component of the connected box to be supplied to F. As the test report of the former Local Small and Medium Enterprise Administration issued by the Defendant was considerably past the date of issuance of the said test report, the Defendant had been willing to revise the date of issuance of the said test report to appear to have been recently issued. On June 17, 2013, the Defendant changed the portion of the survey report of May 17, 201 by printing the date of change using a computer from the said E office and printing it again to the “date of May 17, 2012,” and changed the column of the said test report by copying it again to the electronic reproduction machine.

At the end of June 2013, the Defendant sent the altered test report to F by facsimile as if it was actually issued a true copy of the changed test report at the above E office.

Accordingly, the Defendant altered one copy of the test report under the name of the Administrator of the Small and Medium Business Administration of the Jeonbuk-gu, which is an official document related to the certification of facts, and exercised it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. A criminal investigation report and evidential materials attached thereto;

1. Application of the request for investigation to the Agency for Defense Technology and Quality Assurance, the purchase contract, the specification of the contract, and each test report;

1. Relevant Article 225 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Articles 229 and 225 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor;

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

1. Circumstances and circumstances leading to the instant crime under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act.