beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On January 2016, the Defendant, “2016 Highest 2975, the Defendant, as a director, decided to purchase the building materials owned by the victim D from the victim D on or around the beginning of 2016, had a written confirmation of purchase and sale under the name of the legal entity that he/she is responsible for payment by the legal entity from the victim who has not believed the Defendant’s credit status, and the Defendant had the seal of the said legal entity for the preparation, etc. of a subcontract agreement related to the construction of new apartment units C (ju), with the intention of forging the said legal entity’s name and delivering it to the victim.
1. On January 18, 2016, the Defendant: (a) instructed an employee in charge of accounting, whose name is unknown at the office No. 915 of the Etel, located in Seopopo-si, Seopo-si, Seopo-si, and (b) instructed the said employee to “written confirmation” using the computer; (c) the C (State) agrees that the C (State) will take over construction materials, such as the so-called “written confirmation” using the computer, including the so-called “written confirmation”; and (d) the C (State) agrees that the purchase price will be approved as follows:
On February 2, 2016, KRW 30,00,000,000 won in daily gold, KRW 2 times on March 15, 2016, KRW 30,000 on April 15, 2016, KRW 18,000 on April 2016, and KRW 30,000 on January 18, 2016: Ulsan Metropolitan City Jung-gu G, business operator number: H and Joint Guarantee: H and Joint Guarantee: (I) signed and printed out by the Defendant under the name of “C (State)F” of the output of the above certification.
C (States) seals were affixed.
Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a letter of confirmation in the name of C(state), which is a private document on rights and obligations.
2. On January 18, 2016, the Defendant: (a) delivered a forged confirmation document to D, as described in paragraph 1, at a mutual influent restaurant located in Seopo-si, Seopo-si, Seopo-si, Seopo-si, and exercised it as if it were a document duly formed.
3. The Defendant’s fraud is above the date and time limit set forth in paragraph 2.