If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

(1)On August 1, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around October 21, 2008, the Defendant: (b) drafted to E a copy of the receipt that the Defendant provided to E; (c) “10 million won out of the fixed amount is an intermediate payment out of the Friju’s purchase price; and (d) the remainder of KRW 139,50,000 is paid in the land value to the person who sets up the place of the rest;” (c) submitted a copy of the receipt to the Busan High Court on the receipt dated 21, 2008, stating that “E is not an intermediate payment out of the fixed amount; (d) KRW 100,50,000 out of the fixed amount is an intermediate payment from the Friju’s purchase price; and (e) submitted a copy of the receipt to the Busan High Court on the same date, stating that it shall be given to the person who set up the place of rest; and (e) submitted it to the Busan High Court on the same date.

Accordingly, the defendant, with the aim of being subject to criminal punishment, dismissed E.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of suspect E by the prosecution;

1. The chief of a complaint (the complainant: A and the defendant: E);

1. A written appraisal;

1. The application of the law of “the receipt” as a copy of the receipt at issue, the suspect presents the original and accompanied by a duplicate;

1. Article 156 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. Selection of an alternative fine for punishment;

1. Articles 157, 153 and 55 (1) 6 of the Criminal Act for mitigation of confessions;

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

1. The Defendant filed a criminal complaint under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, which is a false fact, even though the Defendant was a repeated crime period.

However, E, the defendant, who is the defendant, has not been punished for the defendant, and the defendant has led all of the crimes of this case, and is identical to the defendant.