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

. The police officers, who knew of the forgery, submitted to the police officers as if they were duly constituted, and exercised each of them.

Summary of Evidence

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the police officers of the accused;

1. Voluntary consent to accompany;

1. Statement of the circumstances of the driver involved in driving;

1. Application of statutes on site photographs;

1. Relevant legal provisions and Articles 148-2 (2) 2 and 44 (1) of the Road Traffic Act, Article 37 Subparag. 10 of the Resident Registration Act (illegal use of other persons’ resident registration numbers), Article 231 of the Criminal Act, Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act, and selection of imprisonment for a crime;

1. Grounds for sentencing under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes [the scope of recommendations according to the sentencing guidelines for the Supreme Court] 1 and 2 (the forgery and alteration, etc. of private documents) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Concurrent Crimes: The mitigation area (one month to one year), the mitigation area (where social risks are not realized because the ultimate purpose of the crime is not achieved, the forgery, alteration, etc. of private documents) of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes (where the social risks are not realized because of the failure to achieve the ultimate purpose of the crime), the mitigation area (one month to one year) * The final sentencing scope by multiple crimes: From January to June of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Crimes; for six months or more [decision on the punishment]

Nevertheless, each of the crimes of this case has been committed again.

As the Defendant was discovered while driving under the influence of 0.131% alcohol concentration in blood, it is the case in which the police made a forgery of the document while driving under the same manner as he/she was a two nes H.

In light of the circumstances of the case, the nature of the crime is not good.

The defendant did not faithfully respond to the trial process.

In full view of the motive and background of the crime including the above circumstances, the method and consequence of the crime, the circumstances after the crime, the age, environment, and criminal records, etc., the punishment as ordered shall be determined.