허위공문서작성등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.
However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Although the defendant's defense counsel stated that the reasons for appeal submitted to this court are erroneous, the defendant and the defendant's defense counsel withdrawn the above misconception of facts on the second trial date of the trial of the first instance.
The sentence of the lower court (eight months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.
The prosecutor (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) submitted by the prosecutor to this court the reason for appeal was that the court below’s deletion or modification of the facts charged under the premise that the search period of this case was “undeveloped equipment” in Section 2 of each week and Section 4 of each week, and that the court below’s failure to meet and process the items of the integrated military support element sector.
It is difficult to conclude it.
Although the prosecutor stated a mistake of facts as to the decision, he/she withdrawn the allegation of mistake as to the above fact on the first trial date.
Although the Defendant, as the Chief of the Navy D branch of the Navy (hereinafter “D”) of the Navy, should determine whether the required performance has been proven through officially recognized data, such as performance data, development developments, M& development process, performance verification, etc. in performing the purchase test evaluation of K (hereinafter “K”) proposed by J-based (J, hereinafter “J-based”) and the Defendant’s act of preparing and exercising the aforementioned public document constitutes the crime of false performance, since the Defendant, without being submitted by J-based data on the performance verification (ROC) and the technical and auxiliary performance field, an official document, stating as if it satisfied the evaluation criteria on six items in the field of operation performance (ROC) and technical and auxiliary performance, which is an official document, stating as if it satisfied the evaluation criteria on six items in the field of operation performance (RV, SV, IF, and HH) and the result of test and evaluation (type 4) of the purchase of G weapons systems.
Nevertheless, the court below held in Section 4 of each week at the time when the defendant conducted the purchase test evaluation of the instant sound searcher.