A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 10 million won.

Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be paid.

Punishment of the crime

From September 1996, the Defendant works as the head of a department in a military supply company that supplies naval propellers with naval propellers from around September 1996, and is a person who has overall control over all duties, such as a supply contract and quality control with the Defense Acquisition Program Administration.

1. On May 12, 2010, D companies with which the Defendant changed private documents entered into a contract with the Defense Acquisition Program Administration for the supply of 20 kackers by May 28, 2010.

On June 1, 2010, the Defendant requested the Korea Chemical Testing and Research Institute to test and analyze the raw materials of Brazil, and issued a test report (E) under the name of the President of the Korea Chemical Testing and Research Institute on June 1, 2010, but did not meet the component ratio (SI : 0.10% below) and thus no delivery is possible, the Defendant was able to arbitrarily change the composition ratio of the lawsuit and deliver it.

On June 1, 2010, the Defendant changed the composition ratio from "0.11 to "0.10" to "0.10" to "0.10" by means of printing the number in advance in the data numerical value on the test results of the test results conducted in the name of the Director of the Korea Chemical Examination and Research Institute on June 1, 2010, which was located in the office of the D Company in Busan F. F. M. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. F. the Defendant changed from "0. F. F. F.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the defendant altered one copy of the test report under the name of the president of the Korea Chemical Testing Research Institute, which is a private document related to certification of facts.

2. Around June 21, 2010, the Defendant used a copy of the test report under the name of the Director of the Korean Chemical Testing Research Institute, a private document altered as above, to the inspector in the name of the Agency for Defense Technology and Quality Assurance, who visited in order to examine the blackk produced by the D Company at the office of the foregoing D Company, as if it were a document duly formed.

3. On June 2010, the Defendant supplied 20 Brackers to the Police Acquisition Program Administration on June 2010, and the facts are the Brackers’ metal produced by the said D Company.