On January 13, 201, the Defendant was issued one copy of a promissory note (on June 30, 2011, June 30, 2011) issued by G in the office of the company above the fourth floor of the D D Building in Jung-gu, Seoul, from G, under the name of the actual operator of E (RepresentativeF) for the price of goods. However, the Defendant was issued one copy of a promissory note (on June 31, 2011, the payment date) issued by G in the main office of G, which is the price for goods, but the said promissory note cannot be settled at the (on June 30, 2011, the payment date). Around July 2011, the Defendant was issued one copy of the face value per unit (the check number H and the date of payment) of the issuance of the ice education (on December 31, 2011, the check number H and the date of payment).

The Defendant, on July 201, 201, stated “E” on the back of the above list of units of securities for the purpose of exercising the rights and obligations of securities at the office of the said C Co., Ltd. and stated “E” on the back of the above list of units of securities.

(see Article 214(2) of the Criminal Act).

B. On June 2012, the Defendant filed an application for payment order against E in the Seoul Central District Court’s civil petition office located in Seocho-gu Seoul Central District Court’s Seocho-gu, Seoul, for the payment order for the price of the goods, and exercised the same effect as each of the securities shares forged by submitting the name of the endorser company along with one copy of the number of shares forged. “The part 2013 High Court 737”: around June 22, 2012, the Defendant attempted to commit fraud: (a) at the civil petition office of the Seoul Central District Court, the Defendant filed an application for payment order by asserting that “the victim F operates E and transfers the (the check amounted to KRW 46,931,00) of the number of shares issued (the check amount to KRW 46,931,00) as the security for the payment of the goods. However, the victim did not have any endorsement on the number of shares issued by Han-gu Education, and the Defendant merely stated the “E” directly on the back of the check.

Nevertheless, the Defendant belongs to the foregoing.