A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on the grounds as stated in its holding is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles on litigation fraud.

2. On December 7, 2016, the Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Defendant for the return of the loan to the Defendant with the Suwon District Court 70-ro 212-h, Sinyang-si, Jeonyang-si, the Defendant stated in the complaint that “a total of KRW 53,690,000 was lent to the Defendant on May 13, 2014, including lending KRW 40,000 to the Defendant,” and that “a total of KRW 53,690,000 was lent to the Defendant” was submitted as evidentiary materials.

However, in fact, although the defendant lent money to D who works in the name of "C" that he operated, and the victim was merely the nominal owner of the passbook used by "D" and was well aware that it is irrelevant to the above loan obligation, he thought that he would transfer the loan obligation to the victim, who is the nominal owner of the passbook, to the victim who is the nominal owner of the passbook, who does not contact with D.

Nevertheless, on July 7, 2017, the Defendant was rendered a favorable judgment that “The Defendant (victim) would pay to the Plaintiff (Defendant) 53,690,000 won with 15% interest per annum from May 13, 2017 to the date of full payment by deceiving the full bench in charge of the support of the Suwon District Court, and submitting evidentiary materials.”

Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the court, has gained the same amount of property benefits from the victim.

3. The judgment of the court below is based on the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below. ① The victim, who was close to the usual sense, notified the victim of his bad credit standing and allowed the use of his account under the victim's name, and ② D.