logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.05.14 2014고단10281
사기등
Text

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

From April 201 to the date of the Defense Acquisition Program Administration, the Defendant is a person in charge of quality control, such as requesting testing and analysis to an authorized institution for products produced in the above plant, submitting the test report received from an authorized institution to a person in charge of quality inspection for the Agency for Technology and Quality Assurance and Quality Assurance.

1. Around June 5, 2013, the Defendant altered private documents: (a) requested an authorized agency to conduct testing and analysis of subsidiary materials, such as a bomer, drilling, rewing room, etc. attached to a combat uniform; and (b) issued a test report, and then produced combat uniforms, the Defendant had the intent to deliver them by changing the date of the test report under the name of the president of the Korea Testing and Research Institute of Korea issued as of July 4, 2012, issued as of June 28, 2013.

On June 5, 2013, the Defendant changed the number of the test report (KTRI NO) from "E" to "F", and the date of issuance from "07.07.04 to "05.23. 05. 2013."

As a result, the Defendant altered the test report under the name of the president of the Korea Testing Research Institute, which is a private document related to certification of facts, from October 30, 2012 to June 5, 2013, and altered the test report under the name of the president of the Korea Testing Research Institute in the name of the president of the FITI Testing Research Institute and four test reports in the name of the president of the Korea Testing Research Institute in the name of the president of the FITI Testing Research Institute.

2. Around June 5, 2013, the Defendant requested an inspection to the Agency for Defense Technology and Quality Assurance with respect to “satisfs on combat clothes” attached to the foregoing D Factory Office, and requested the inspection to the Agency for Defense Technology and Quality Assurance, which may not know that the alteration is made.

arrow