2. Where the defendant does not pay the above fine. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 16090, Jan. 1

Around May 30, 2016, without authority, the Defendant did not have obtained delegation or consent from the “E real estate office” office operated by the Defendant in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and the Defendant did not use the “written consent form,” which appointed the G management group representative, submitted to G management unit the form “F”, “H”, “H”, “I”, “I”, “I”, and “I”, and “I” in the “F” column in the name of “F”, a private document verifying each fact,” and at that time, submitted the said written consent form to the G management unit as if the written consent form was duly completed.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of the witness F and J;

1. Some statements made to the accused in the police interrogation protocol (including the F part of the statement);

1. A written consent to the K to examine the suspect (including a copy of the written consent attached thereto);

1. The defendant and his defense counsel asserted to the effect that the preparation of the above private document does not fall under the above Article because the defendant obtained prior consent from F at the time of obtaining the consent on the preparation of the private document in the judgment from F.

However, as recognized by the above evidence, the F stated that there was no consent from the investigative agency to this court, and that the F does not have any reason to entrust the Defendant with the preparation of a written consent as he resides in G. The F did not have any interest in the management unit of the above apartment complex and there was no explanation for the reasons why the Defendant asserted that he did not have any interest in the management unit of the apartment complex and was neutral, and that the Defendant voluntarily selected I from among the two representative candidates to be managed in the above written consent.