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.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who has been in charge of bidding affairs by the director of the Security Enterprise Co., Ltd. in the third floor of the Suwon-si building B.

On January 17, 2020, the Defendant prepared documents necessary for the participation in the bidding of the aforementioned company D apartment security service company. On January 17, 2020, in the process of preparing documents necessary for the participation in the bidding of the said company D apartment security service company, the period of inquiry indicated on the documents indicating the administrative disposition of the aforementioned company under the Security Industry Act was to be submitted to the tender

1. Around January 17, 2020, the Defendant modified the official document by using a computer, “written reply as to whether an administrative disposition under the Security Services Industry Act exists” received from the Suwon-Nam Police Station as of January 6, 2020.

Since then, the defendant using the cans image screen, which is a image editing program, changed the date of the "case requesting the issuance of a written confirmation of administrative disposition on October 03, 201" in the main text into "No. 15, 201," and "a case" in paragraph (2).

The period of inquiry: (a) changed the date of “from 01 to 06, 2020.” from 01 to 06, 2018 to “from 01, 2018 to 15, 2020.” (b) changed the portion of “1, 2020.15,” which is the date of approval and enforcement date of the official document, to “1, 2020.15,” and then changed to “1, 2020.15,” and then printed out one image as a printer.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant modified a copy of the “written reply as to whether or not there is an administrative disposition under the Security Services Industry Act” under the name of the head of Suwon-Nam Police Station, a public document.

2. Around January 17, 2020, the Defendant sent a written reply as to whether or not there was an administrative disposition under the ICC Security Industry Act, which altered as stated in the above Paragraph (1), to D apartment management office by registered mail along with other documents for application for a bid, and the staff in charge of the management office who was unaware of such alteration at that time did not receive the said document.

Accordingly, the defendant exercised one copy of the altered official document.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal statement; 1.1.