Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 700,000.

If the Defendants did not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Criminal facts

1. On May 23, 2017, the Defendants conspired to prepare private documents, and around May 23, 2017, in the Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Office for Management of Officetel, the Defendants, and the Defendants, on May 11, 2017, retired from office with the president of the Office for Management of Office Work, and thus, the Director does not have the authority to approve the documents drafted, and the Defendants did not have the authority to approve the documents proposed by the Director. In addition, the Defendants, without authority, made a copy of the draft form, which is a private document concerning rights and duties, written “A” and “B,” stating the Defendants’ name in the Chairman of the Office for Management of Office Office Work (B101-4) and the general secretary’s name in the letter of draft form, “A” and “B,” respectively, with the aim of exercising the authority.

2. At that time, the Defendants conspired to display private documents, and held the draft form prepared with qualification ambiguously inside the above management office as if they were duly formed.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant A’s legal statement

1. Land for a draft;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the police interrogation protocol concerning E;

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and the Defendants of the choice of punishment concerning the facts constituting an offense: Articles 232, 30 (a point of preparing private documents for qualification) of the Criminal Act, Articles 234, 232, and 30 (a point of uttering of private documents prepared for qualification as qualification) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of each fine;

1. Defendants who are subject to aggravated concurrent crimes: the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants to be detained in the workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: The grounds for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act shall be determined by taking into account the circumstances leading to the instant crime and the type of documents prepared by the Defendants, including the process leading up to the instant crime, the qualification of which are ambiguous, as well as the various factors revealed in the process of the instant case and the trial.