A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

D Around February 2005, around E (F in the name before the opening of the name) purchased a house of 380 square meters in Pyeongtaek-si G forest in Gyeonggi-do, but did not complete the registration of transfer of ownership, and E obtained a building permit in its name on the said land. The Defendant entered into a construction contract for constructing a multi-family house on the said land with D around September 2014 as a constructor operating H construction company.

D around September 2014, the term “D” was indicated in the column of “B” principal contractor A” in the standard subcontract agreement for construction works under the above construction contract. At the request of E, the owner of the registered interest on the construction permit, the owner of the registered interest on the construction permit, and obtained the signature of “F” in the column of “B”.

Even if the subcontractor is not a subcontractor, the Defendant had the question as mentioned above, and had the intention to change E to the guarantor for the obligation for the payment of the construction price in the above contract without the authority.

On September 27, 2014, the Defendant received the said contract from D on the said construction site, and then revised the said subcontractor’s part of the said subcontractor’s “contractor” without the consent of E by marking the number of lines on the right side of the said subcontractor and marking it as the surety’s “contractor” on the margin below, and entered “H construction (State A).”

Since then, the Defendant violated several lines on the part of the above “B” at a place where it is unknown to the Defendant, and attached the seal impression of the Defendant’s operation, thereby changing the said contract as if he were the principal contractor D, the Defendant, and the principal contractor E.

After that, on June 1, 2015, the defendant filed an application for provisional seizure against E based on the above contract with the Suwon District Court in Pyeongtaek-si Dong-dong, Gyeonggi-do, the defendant submitted one copy of the modified contract to the court employee who is not aware of the alteration.

Accordingly, the defendant is a private document related to rights and obligations for the purpose of uttering.