A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months and by imprisonment with prison labor for six months.

except that from the date of this judgment.

Defendant

On November 25, 2016, A was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 6 months for a violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act by the District Court of the Republic of Korea on November 25, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 3, 2016.

1. Crimes related to E-related crimes of limited companies;

A. On June 22, 2015, Defendant A requested the “G” office located on the third floor of the Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government FF building to provide a certified copy of the resident registration card, a certificate of personal seal impression, a copy of identification card, and a certificate of personal seal impression, and an agent for applying for registration of the establishment of a limited company. The employees of the “G” certified judicial scrivener office in the name of Defendant A prepared a false document necessary for filing an application for registration of the establishment of the limited company, with the articles of incorporation of the limited company under the name of Defendant E, a director appointment letter, a certificate of personal seal impression, an individual report, a receipt of investment, and a letter of delegation for application for registration, and submitted a document to the Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul District Court on June 22, 2015, as above, as if the receipt of investment was not known to the registered public official, as if the registered official was duly formed a limited company E.

However, the fact that there was no contribution from the above corporation.

Accordingly, the above registry official entered the “Company E” of the company with limited liability, “Seoul Yeongdeungpo-gu, 1209”, “5,000 won per investment account,” “20,000 won” of the total amount of capital, “sales business such as clothes, bags, shoes, shoes, liquid books, and paintings,” and “A” of directors, etc. in the commercial registry computer system, which is the same electronic records as the commercial registry, and stored and operated the commercial registry electronic data processing system with false facts as above.

As a result, Defendant A made a false report to a public official to record false facts in the same electronic record as the original copy of the process deed, and to store and operate the same electronic record as the commercial register in which false facts are recorded.