However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

The Defendant, in collusion with name-free loan brokers and G, prepared G’s false certificate of employment and a false lease contract, pretended G to be a false lessee, Defendant, and submitted relevant documents to the financial institution, and applied for the employee’s pre-lease loan. The Defendant, a false lessor, at the financial institution, requested for a pre-lease loan to receive confirmation as if the contract was entered into. In doing so, the Defendant applied for the employee’s pre-lease loan and received it, and conspired to commit the crime to divide the loan after receiving it.

According to the above public offering, around April 2012, the loan hub created a false certificate of employment as if G works in H and related documents, such as a false certificate of employment, and the false lease contract with the Defendant, a lessor, prepared a false lease contract for the “Guri-si I Apartment 103, 402, old-si I Apartment 103, 402” and transferred G to G for a loan application.

G filed an application for the loan of employee pre-paid loan at the center of the old bank, which was located in the Chang-dong at the end of the end of April 2015, G submitted a false employment certificate and a false pre-paid contract as if the loan was a genuine document, while applying for the loan of employee pre-paid loan as if the loan was actually used as a deposit for the pre-paid deposit.

However, the G did not have worked in H, and the defendant did not have actually entered into a lease contract with G on the above apartment, and even if he received a worker's lease loan, he did not intend to use it as a lease deposit.

Accordingly, the Defendant, in collusion with G, obtained money from the damaged person in collusion with his name-free loan hub and G on May 4, 2012, by remitting KRW 50 million from the damaged person to the account under the name of the Defendant for the entire housing loan for workers.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant ..