A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

To the extent that it does not substantially disadvantage the defendant's exercise of his/her right to defense, the following facts charged shall be organized and criminal facts shall be recognized:

The Defendant purchased a forged promissory note from the suppliers of the B/L, which was demanded by C to repay the debt, and had the intent to substitute the said promissory note for the repayment of the debt.

1. The Defendant forged securities: (a) contact with the nameless bearers who supply forged promissory notes via D (tentatively referred to as “debrising note supplier”) and offered to use the blanks of the said promissory note with a face value of KRW 500,000,000 for the Defendant to prepare and use the blanks at will; (b) around August 20, 2014, the Defendant was issued a copy of a promissory note with a face value, the face value of which is the blanks sent by the non-existences of name in the blue-ri station located in the Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government,

On August 20, 2014, the Defendant: (a) on August 20, 2014, entered H in the column of the amount of promissory notes stated as C, the National Federation of Agricultural Cooperatives, the branch offices of the Navy, the place of payment, and the number of promissory notes number E, August 21, 2014, the date of issuance, November 30, 2014, and the representative director G of the issuer F, the Defendant stated H in the column of the amount of promissory notes, the amount of which is written as G, the issuer’s representative director.

Accordingly, the Defendant forged a copy of a promissory note in the name of F, a securities company, in collusion with a supplier of a non-name-band-band-band-band-band-

2. On August 20, 2014, the Defendant: (a) issued a forged promissory note to C, who is well aware of the fact, as if it were actually issued; and (b) exercised it under the pretext of payment for goods.

3. On August 20, 2014, the Defendant: (a) at the J restaurant located in Guri-si I; and (b) at the J restaurant located in Guri-si I, the Defendant provided the victim C with a copy of the said Promissory Notes to pay for construction materials.

However, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Promissory Notes with forged promissory Notes.