The defendant shall be innocent.

In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was aware of the fact that the Defendant was aware of

1. Around 15:00 on December 27, 2012, the Defendant: (a) printed on the paper “Road Ledger” (hereinafter “Road Ledger”) to be attached to the application form for designation public notice at a coffee shop located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu; and (b) printed on the paper “The designated road shall be deemed a road pursuant to Article 45 of the Building Act; (c) the designated road shall be deemed a road pursuant to Article 2 of the Building Act; and (d) written on the side signature box printed “The relevant lot number E, Dong-gu, Ulsan-gu, the consented area E, the land owner D (C) date of birth”; and (c) written on the side signature box printed on “C well-known D” using the fence, and written on “related G, the consent area of 662 square meters” and “land owner C” as “the date of birth” and “the owner of the land owner’s consent number 31 square meters”.

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising authority, the Defendant forged one copy of the road register in the name of C widely known D, which is a private document concerning a certificate of fact.

2. On December 28, 2012, the Defendant issued a forged road register to K, who is a public official in charge of construction affairs, who is not aware of such forgery, as seen above, as if it was a document duly formed.

Maz.

1. The defendant and the defense counsel's defense counsel's implied or presumed consent.