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

On November 16, 200, the Defendant issued a joint and several guarantee for the obligation owed to C by the Housing Construction Co., Ltd., in the D Office operated by the Daegu-gun District under C on November 16, 2000, and directly signed and sealed it in the column of the joint and several guarantee for cash tea certificate.

After that, C submitted the evidence of the above money borrowed on January 16, 2002 as evidence, and C submitted a lawsuit claiming the payment of guaranteed debt against the defendant.

for the same year.

7.2. Upon receiving a favorable judgment, on June 29, 2012, a lawsuit was instituted with the same content as an extension of extinctive prescription of a claim pursuant to the foregoing judgment (hereinafter “the second lawsuit”) and another evidence was submitted to the court for winning a favorable judgment on November 27, 2013, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on September 13, 2013.

However, in the second lawsuit, the Defendant asserted that the said monetary rent was forged, but the court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the ground that “The defense of the said Article with respect to monetary rent constitutes a reason that could have been asserted before the closing of argument in the first lawsuit, and thus, cannot be asserted in the second lawsuit, which is block by res judicata and cannot be asserted in the second lawsuit.”

Accordingly, the Defendant filed a complaint with C as a crime of fraud, received a final judgment of conviction, and filed a request for reexamination on the grounds thereof, thereby inducing C from paying the guaranteed debt.

On December 2, 2013, the Defendant prepared a false complaint with respect to C through a certified judicial scrivener office in which it is impossible to know the trade name in Seoul.

Although the complainant had not jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation ( principal 15 million won) to the Defendant who is a creditor of the housing construction on January 16, 2002, the complainant was judged in favor of the complainant by forging the certificate of monetary rent stated as a joint and several surety and submitting it to the court on January 16, 2002, and again submitting it as evidence in a lawsuit for the extension of the prescription period on June 29, 2012.