1. On February 3, 2010, the Defendant forged private documents: (a) stated “C” clubs purchased from the door-gu “C” club operated by the Defendant in Sinpo City B, stating “B, 50 square meters in size, 50 square meters in size, deposit money for lease on a deposit basis, ten million won in monthly rent,” and “D” in the lessor column, and affixed the seal of D’s name and seal affixed by the Defendant on his own name.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the defendant forged a lease contract in the name of D, a private document on rights and obligations.

2. The Defendant: (a) delivered the forged lease agreement as if it was a document that was duly formed at the visitors’ room in the Simpo-dong, Simpo-si, Simpo-si, Simpo-si; and (b) delivered the forged lease agreement to E as if it were a document.

3. The criminal defendant borrowed KRW 10 million from the victim E in a wooden-ro entrance room in the Sinpo-dong from the date and time set forth in paragraph (1) of this Article in a false manner as if the lease deposit, which can be returned from D, was the cause of KRW 10 million, by presenting a forged lease agreement.

However, in fact, the above lease contract was forged, and the lease deposit which the defendant can receive from D was only 5 million won.

The defendant received 10 million won from the victim and acquired it by fraud.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement of E and F;

1. - Evidence of rent, - Real Estate Lease Agreements, - Application of Ministerial Statutes

1. Relevant Article 231 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, Articles 231 of the Criminal Act, Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act, Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment, respectively;

1. The reasons for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act among concurrent crimes are morale and the accused.