Around December 20, 201, the Defendant: (a) at the office of a certified judicial scrivener in Maok-dong, the Defendant prepared a letter of complaint stating, “A, the Defendant, as the debtor, shall be deemed a joint and several surety for the Defendant against D’s Defendant by means of copying the name, resident registration number, address, and unmanned attached to the paper of the payment agreement already prepared by D as the debtor on September 6, 2008; and (b) submitted a letter of complaint stating that “A, as the joint and several surety for the Defendant’s Defendant, submitted an application for provisional attachment of the house owned by the Defendant to the Gwangju District Court for the provisional attachment on the house owned by the Defendant, on December 22, 2008; and (c) submitted the above letter of complaint to the official in charge of the public service center, whose name may not be known, in the public service center on the paper of payment agreement drawn up by the Defendant as the debtor.” (d) On January 6, 2012

However, in fact, the Defendant stated in the above letter of payment that “A, E, or F-house 23 of the F-house 23 of the Joint and Several Guarantor” was directly unmannedd next to the name of the Defendant.

As a result, the defendant was arrested for the purpose of having C receive criminal punishment.

Summary of Evidence

1. C’s legal statement;

1. Part C of the interrogation protocol of the second prosecutor's office against the defendant

1. Part of the police statement concerning D;

1. Complaints of the accused;

1. The letter of commitment;

1. A request for appraisal;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes governing the entrustment of appraisal to G;

1. The reason for conviction under Article 156 of the Criminal Act and Article 156 (Selection of Imprisonment) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts and Article 156 (Selection of Imprisonment) argues that since C has forged the above letter of payment because it is true that C has forged the above letter of payment, the defendant did not file a false complaint. However, according to the document appraisal result conducted by the National Scientific Investigation Institute at the investigative agency and the unmanned appraisal result conducted by this court at the request of the defendant, it is written and sealed in the letter of payment.