However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On November 27, 2013, the Defendant appeared on the date for specification of property in the Suwon District Court’s case of 2013 Kao-name 6815, which was held in court No. 211, No. 2011, Nov. 27, 2013, and the facts are as follows: (a) around September 23, 201 and around September 28, 201, the facts charged amounting to KRW 14.7 billion against C, which was subject to the obligor C’s order of seizure and collection as to the claim against the claim against the third obligor of the Defendant of the Defendant Company C, is “the amount equivalent to KRW 24.7 billion”; (b) However, according to each of the above evidence, it is recognized that the Defendant’s claim against C, who was subject to a seizure and collection order as stated in the facts charged, is deemed

However, since only the amount of the same claim that has not been prepared in the bond list is different, the innocence shall not be pronounced for a separate reason.

Despite the fact that the claim was claimed, the above claim did not enter it in the property list and issued a false property list.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement of the protocol concerning the interrogation of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement made in the police statement protocol with D;

1. Entry of each written judgment, written decision and protocol of the date clearly stated in the property;

1. To enter the claims in the seizure and collection order;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes entered in the investigation report (Submission of a written decision on the seizure and collection order of the suspect);

1. Relevant provisions of the Acts concerning facts constituting an offense and Article 68 (9) of the Civil Execution Act concerning the choice of punishment (elective of imprisonment);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution (Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the grounds that there is no record of crime except for the defendant who has been punished once for a crime of this kind, and that there is no reason to consider the circumstances of the crime of this case);