When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

On March 3, 2011, the Defendant lent KRW 30 million to the victim C and D, and the obligor D and joint obligor C, and the due date for repayment was written with the above D and C as of March 2, 2015.

On January 1, 2012, the Defendant changed the date of repayment of the above loan certificate to March 2, 2012, using a tample, in the “F office” office operated by the Defendant in Jeju-si, without C’s permission, to alter one copy of the loan certificate, which is a private document concerning the rights and obligations under the name C, from March 2, 2012. On March 19, 2013, the Defendant filed a lawsuit claiming a loan against C with the civil division of the Jeju District Court, and exercised it by submitting the modified loan certificate to the said civil petition office by submitting it to the competent civil petition office.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. C’s statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Application of the loan certificate and the statute of complaint;

1. Relevant Article 231 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the facts constituting an offense, Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act, and the choice of fines, respectively;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The assertion;

A. Since the defendant changed the date of repayment with D's consent and C has delegated a comprehensive delegation to D on the repayment of the defendant's obligation to D, even without C's explicit consent on the change of the due date, D's consent shall be deemed to be included in C's consent, and even if not, C's constructive consent is expected.

B. The de facto marital couple has the right of representation for the daily home life, and the money borrowed in this case is intended for D and C to open a store for the purpose of maintaining their livelihood, so D is entitled to waive the benefit of the time limit for the borrowed debt and change the repayment date on behalf of C.