A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months, and imprisonment with prison labor for six months.

However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.

1. The Defendants conspired to forge a commercial lease agreement in which deposit money is false and to obtain a loan from the trading company and to obtain the loan from the trading company. The Defendants are those who operated the mutual key points of the trade name “F” in the name of Defendant B from the Gu government-si building E and from the first floor.

A. On September 2015, Defendant A: (a) printed out the document stating “F” at the main point of “F”; (b) in the column of the location of real estate (commercial buildings) monthly medicine of Gyeonggi-do; (c) the deposit; (d) the deposit; (d) the down payment; (e) the remainder of the deposit; (d) the rent; (e) the rent; (e) the rent; and (e) the lessor’s name; and (e) the document stating “G” was destroyed by the name of G.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to forge a chapter 1 of the real estate in the name of H, a private document on rights and obligations.

B. Within the main point of “F” around September 2015, the Defendants exercised the said investigation document, stating that “The amount of KRW 20 million loan to an employee of an alcoholic beverage sales company shall be changed to a loan for alcoholic beverage supply.” The Defendants issued a forged real estate (commercial building) global medicine as if they were actually prepared, and exercised the same.

(c)

In September 2015, the Defendants made a false statement to the effect that “F” is to the employees I of the victim plaza sales company (“F”) to the effect that “bred KRW 20 million as a loan for alcoholic beverage supply.” It is possible for the Defendants to receive a lease deposit of KRW 20 million. In this sense, the Defendants made a false statement to the effect that “I would know that I would be able to receive a lease deposit.”

However, the Defendants did not have the intent or ability to repay money even if they borrowed money from the injured party. The real estate monthly rent contract issued by the Defendants was forged by the above method, and the actual deposit was merely KRW 13 million, and the Defendants did not pay rent and thus, the security deposit to be returned was almost impossible.