beta
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.05.12 2013고정3093

무고

Text

Defendants shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

The Defendants did not pay each of the above fines.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On February 26, 2013, the Defendants conspired with the Daejeon District Public Prosecutor’s Office located in Seocheon-dong, Seocheon-si, Daejeon. The Defendants agreed that E’s investment funds shall be appropriated for the amount of loans obtained as collateral when each of the above real estate was transferred to three joint owners at the time when each of the parties purchased the above real estate in proportion to the ratio of the purchase price invested. According to the agreement, on August 9, 2010, when E obtained a loan of KRW 400 million from the Seocheon-si Forestry Association as collateral, the Defendants visited the Seocheon-si Forestry Association as well as signing and sealing the agreement to establish a collateral security contract, and thus, the plans to develop the above real estate as a housing site were not proper, and thus, E would be subject to criminal punishment. In order to obtain criminal punishment, the Defendant, who is the Defendant, submitted a false loan of KRW 400 million to the forestry association, which is a joint owner, by submitting a false loan document, under the name of the EF. 4,010.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement made by witnesses E in the third protocol of the trial;

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. Examination protocol of suspect E by the prosecution;

1. A copy of a document to establish a right to collateral security, a copy of a document to establish a right, a copy of a written agreement to assume a liability, or a copy of a

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Defendants: Articles 156 and 30 of the Criminal Act;

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

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: the Defendants and the defense counsel’s defense counsel’s assertion under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act were signed by the Defendants, but the Defendants signed the instant contract to establish a collateral security.