A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

From October 2012 to May 2013, the Defendant is a person who works in D, “D,” a man-made Corporation and a contractor, as a man-made Corporation and a contractor.

1. Around October 2012, the Defendant of the Mapo Tax Office’s business registration certificate under the name of Mapo Tax Office: (a) made out and printed out “D” offices located in Mapo-gu Seoul E building 202 using computers located in the said offices, using the said offices, using a computer, with the word “Nonindicted 1” and “A”; and (b) made out the name of the Mapo Tax Office’s business registration certificate on “D” on the side of “F” in the name of the head of Mapo Tax Office; and (c) attached “A” on the side column of the joint business place, and copied it.

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising, the Defendant forged a business registration certificate for D in the name of Mapo Tax Office, an official document.

Around October 2012, the Defendant entered into a subcontract for remodeling works at the coffee shop in Seoul Jung-gu, Seoul, with G Representative H, and presented it to H as if he was actually issued a business registration certificate, which is a forged official document, as above, and exercised it.

2. A business registration certificate under the name of the director of the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office on March 2013, the Defendant posted “A” on the side of “D” office located in 402 of the International Building of Gangseo-gu, Seoul, and on the side of “F” the name of the director of the Gangseo-gu Office on the “D” under the name of the director of the Gangseo-gu Office by means of paragraph (1) and copied it.

Accordingly, the defendant, for the purpose of exercising his official document, forged a business registration certificate for D in the name of the director of the district tax office.

On March 2013, the Defendant entered into a subcontract agreement with G Representative H to remodeld Construction at the “D” office located in the above I building No. 402, and displayed it as if he were issued a true certificate of business registration, which is a forged public document, to H, who knew of the forgery.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's legal statement; 1.1.