Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

1. On September 20, 201, the Defendant forged private documents, without obtaining consent from D, E, and F for the purpose of uttering in his/her residence C 402, Ansan-gu, Ansan-gu, Annyang-si, the Defendant stated the name, resident registration number, and Hand phone number column of the written statement stating that “G was frighting to a large amount of friend that the weather of the weather of the weather of which is conducted by the English Private Teaching Institutes,” and written his/her signature in each wrapping column without obtaining consent from D, E, and F.

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising, the Defendant forged three statements, such as D related to a certificate of fact.

2. On October 12, 201, the Defendant: (a) received a written complaint of interference with business affairs related to G from the public service center of the Ansanan Police Station; and (b) submitted a forged statement as stated in paragraph (1) to a public official under his/her name, who works at the same time, as the document duly formed.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A written statement attached to the written complaint (6-7 pages of investigation records);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a criminal investigation report (to hear D phone statements for reference) and a criminal investigation report (to hear statements of a written confirmation);

1. Article 231 of the Criminal Act, Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the ordinary concurrent crimes (mutual crimes of forging private documents and between crimes of uttering of private documents);

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The number of persons who stolen the name of the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order is multiple. Even if the defendant committed each of the of the of the of the instant crimes in order to submit a written statement as evidence in the case that the defendant filed a complaint against the crime of interference with business by interference with business, and thereafter there was an agreement with G to not file a future civil or criminal objection, even though the authenticity of the document does not extinguish the punishment of each of the instant crimes whose legal interest is the authenticity of the document.