Part of the facts charged was corrected ex officio to the extent that it does not interfere with the defendant's defense right.

[criminal record] On March 30, 2006, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor due to an accusation, coercion, etc. at the Seoul Eastern District Court on January 30, 2008 and was released on January 30, 2008 and the parole period expired on April 14, 2008.

[Criminal facts]

1. An accusation;

A. A. Around October 26, 2008, the Defendant drafted a written complaint with the purpose of having D criminal punishment at the Defendant’s dwelling and office located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building C. Around October 26, 2008. The content of the written complaint is that “D, in a trial including the crime of coercion against the Defendant who filed a complaint by the Defendant, issued a perjury that the agreement attached to the written complaint was modified for the purpose of having the Defendant punished.” However, there was no fact that the written agreement attached to the written complaint by the above E was modified, and therefore, D was not proven.

Nevertheless, on October 27, 2008, the Defendant submitted the above complaint to the Seoul Songpa Police Station civil petition office located in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Songpa-dong, Songpa-gu, Seoul, and rejected the above complaint.

B. Around August 20, 2010, the Defendant prepared a written complaint with the intent to have D criminal punishment at the above Defendant’s residence and office. The content of the written complaint is that “D, in a trial, such as coercion against the Defendant who filed a complaint by the Defendant, issued a perjury with the knowledge of the alteration of the written complaint attached to the E’s written complaint for the purpose of criminal punishment for the Defendant, that “A request for punishment because he/she did not know of the alteration of the written complaint attached to the E’s written complaint,” but in fact, there was no fact that the written agreement attached to the above written complaint was modified, and therefore, D did not prove

Nevertheless, on August 20, 2010, the defendant submitted the above complaint to the public prosecutor's office of the Gu government, which is in the Dong of the Government of the Gyeonggi-do.