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

While the Defendant had been instructed to cause the damage, the Defendant was willing to enter into a lease contract with the former tenant and to acquire the deposit money by means of taking the lease contract with the former tenant as the owner's agent against the 207-dong and 2004-dong and the Busan Geum-gu apartment house of KRW 200,000,000 in the monthly rent of KRW 20,00,000.

1. On February 6, 2010, the Defendant forged private documents: (a) at the F Licensed Real Estate Agent Office located in Geumcheon-gu, Busan Metropolitan Government, G, a licensed real estate agent G, who is not aware of the fact, used the computer network in the lease contract for the apartment of the above apartment; (b) at the address column of the lessor, “I”, “J” and “D” in the resident registration number column for the resident registration number column for the foregoing apartment; and (c) at the resident registration number column for the agent, “K and telephone number column” and “I” and “I” have written “A” in the name column for D’s name and affix the D’s seal arbitrarily affixed to D’s name.

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising authority, the Defendant forged a lease contract under the name of D, which is a private document on rights and obligations.

2. The Defendant, at the same time and place as in paragraph (1), delivered to M as if he were the document duly formed, one of the forged pre-sale contract was delivered to M, who was aware of the forgery.

3. The fraud Defendant made a false statement to the victim M& at the same time and place as Paragraph 1, stating that “In-house D’s friendship, the main owner of C Apartment 207, 2004, and the Republic of Korea has the authority to conclude a lease contract on behalf of D, and if the lease deposit amount is KRW 200 million, the above apartment will be transferred to the owner as the former owner.”

However, in fact, the defendant was not only the tenant of the above apartment, but also D, and it did not have the authority to conclude the above apartment house lease contract because it did not have the authority to conclude the lease contract of the above apartment, and there was approximately KRW 300 million personal obligation from the creditors.