Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.
However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On October 10, 2018, at C office located in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, the Defendant: (a) had the intent to use the certificate of tax payment, which is one of the documents for bidding to participate in the tendering procedure for advertising advertisement attachment project in D apartment; (b) had the spouse E issued by the head of the Dong-gu Tax Office on August 17, 2017; (c) changed the term of validity of the certificate indicated in the certificate of tax payment to October 10, 2018; and (d) exercised the certificate of tax payment under the name of the head of the Dong-gu Tax Office, the accusation for the purpose of exercising the certificate by changing the date of issuance to November 9, 2018; and (c) exercised the certificate of tax payment under the name of the head of the Dong-gu Tax Office, the head of the Dong-gu, Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, which changed the certificate of tax payment from the D apartment management office to the above apartment management office as if it was duly formed.
Summary of Evidence
1. Defendant's legal statement;
1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a written accusation, a copy of tax payment certificate, and a copy of receipt;
1. Article 225 of the Criminal Act, Articles 229 and 225 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;
1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;
1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;
1. In cases where social risks are not realized because the ultimate objective of the mitigation area (4-1 year) (special mitigation) of the mitigation area (4-1 year) is not achieved due to the fabrication, alteration, etc. of official documents, etc. (a decision on a declaration of sentence] the purpose of the crime that the defendant intended to participate in the tender was not achieved, and the fact that the defendant was not subject to a fine for the violation of the Road Traffic Act in 2007 and there are no special criminal records other than the fine imposed on him/her due to the violation of