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

The Defendant is a person who operates Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government “C”.

No person shall be designated as a designated or provisionally designated cultural heritage by fraud or other improper means.

On February 23, 2015, the Defendant filed an application for the designation of the Do-designated cultural heritage in Gyeyang-gu, Soyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, Seoyang-gu, and 10 Goyang-gu, the Defendant filed an application for the designation of the Do-designated cultural heritage with respect to the Defendant’s “Monthly Man-gu,” and submitted to the person in charge of culture and arts as well as the employee in charge of culture and arts as well as cultural heritage to the person in charge of Goyang-si, who had been purchased in Germany by introducing the Do-designated cultural heritage in 2002 at the time of returning to Korea in 2002.”

However, in fact, the above monthly stone book, which was applied for the designation of cultural properties, was the same as a collateral for the repayment of debts from D on May 2, 2013.

Accordingly, the Defendant made a false assertion on the purchase route, source, etc., and attempted to designate the monthly stone book possessed by the Defendant as a designated cultural property, and attempted to confirm that the monthly stone book is not a serious material.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol regarding E;

1. A contract for transfer or acquisition of art works;

1. An application for designation of a Do designated cultural heritage and a warden;

1. Notification of ancient cities, application of the Gyeonggi-do Cultural Heritage Committee's deliberation data statutes;

1. Articles 97 (1) and 91 of the Cultural Heritage Protection Act applicable to criminal facts;

1. Article 53 or 55 (1) 3 of the Criminal Act for discretionary mitigation (i.e., circumstances favorable to the following reasons for sentencing):

1. The reason for conviction under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (the grounds for the sentencing referred to in the following subparagraph) of the suspended sentence;

1. It is not confirmed that the main point of the assertion is that the monthly stone stone book (hereinafter “monthly stone book”) is not a serious fact, and it is not confirmed.