2014dan3368 Forgery, uttering of a private document, forgery of a private signature, and an investigation

Signature Exercising

Park -○ (87 years, South Korea), Company Board

J. (Court Prosecution) and Kim Customs (Court Trial)

March 26, 2015

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

except that the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The defendant shall be ordered to provide community service for 80 hours.

Criminal facts

1. Forgery of private documents on a written intent of voluntary behavior, or uttering of a falsified private document;

(a) Forgery of private documents;

On September 23, 2014: at around 00, the Defendant requested a police officer belonging to the Ulsan-dong Police Station, Ulsan-dong Police Station, who was called up after receiving a report of 112 days from A and C, to voluntarily move to the Ulsan-dong Police Station, from the police officer belonging to the Ulsan-dong Police Agency, who was called up after receiving a report of 112 days at the front day of the Kansan-dong Police Station cafeteria, which was located in the defense dong-dong, Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu. On September 24, 201, the Defendant made the Defendant’s name of Brone, who is the Defendant’s punishment, and signed his name on B

Accordingly, the defendant, for the purpose of uttering, forged a letter of voluntary written consent to gambling in the name of "Bebb", which is a private document on confirmation of facts.

(b) Exercising a falsified investigation document;

The defendant, at the same time and place as mentioned in the preceding paragraph, exercised the letter of intent to commit a forged voluntary action as if it were a document duly formed as stated in the preceding paragraph 1-A.

2. Forgery of private signature, and uttering of a falsified investigation or signature;

(a) Forgery of private signature;

On September 25, 2014: around 49, the Defendant was subject to an investigation by the Ulsan-dong Police Station and at the 3 criminal team office of Ulsan-dong Police Station located in Ulsan-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si to the investigation of the crime of assault and the crime of assaulting from the scambol-gu-gu-gu-gu-dong-gu-dong-gu-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si-

(b) Exercising the above investigation signature;

On September 25, 2014: around 29: (a) around 29: the Defendant, at the place indicated in paragraph 2-A; (b) exercised the suspect’s protocol of interrogation in which the signature of Bright was forged, as stated in paragraph 2-A. As if the signature was duly formed, the Defendant exercised the suspect’s protocol of interrogation in which it was forged.

3. Forgery of private documents to the written agreement, and uttering of private research documents.

(a) Forgery of private documents;

On October 7, 2014, the Defendant drafted a written agreement on the assault case A and the previous assault case A with Ulsan (hereinafter referred to as "Sulsan") around October 7, 2014, and made it known to the name column of the suspect on March 25, 1986, "Bale Bale Bale Bale Bale Bale Bale Bale Bale," and affixed the Defendant's signature on the suspect column of the end of the written agreement on March 25, 1986 at will on the name of the suspect column, and affixed the Defendant's unmanned seal. Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising the right and duty, the Defendant forged one copy of the written agreement in the name of Bale Bale Bal

(b) Exercising a falsified investigation document;

On October 10, 2014, the Defendant, at the Ulsan-dong Police Station located in Ulsan-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong, Ulsan-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong, Ulsan-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si,

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Voluntary written consent;

1. Examination protocol of suspect (Recording Nos. 2);

1. A written agreement;

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 231 of the Criminal Act (Aggravated Punishment of Private Document, Imprisonment), Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act (abstinence of a private document, imprisonment with labor), Article 239(1) of the Criminal Act (abstinence of private signature) and Article 239(2) and (1) of the Criminal Act (abstinence of a private document)

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Social service order;

Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

The reason for sentencing is that the defendant is sentenced to his punishment by an investigative agency in order to be exempted from criminal punishment, and a variety of crimes stated in the facts of crime is poor, and the circumstances of the crime are not less complicated.

However, the punishment shall be determined and sentenced as ordered in consideration of the fact that the defendant recognizes the crime, that there is no record of punishment or of the same kind of crime, and that the agreement has been actually reached as stated in the agreement.

Judges Kim Byung-hee