However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. "2017 Highest 6391";

A. On December 1, 2016, the Defendant forged a private document: (a) at the last place of business with the trade name “D” operated by the Defendant located in Suwon-si, Suwon-si; (b) as if the Defendant had a claim for a security deposit in the name of the Defendant E, the Defendant provided a lease contract as security; and (c) provided a loan to borrow money from F, the Defendant arbitrarily prepares a real estate lease agreement stating that “The third floor of the building located in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, with the amount of KRW 20 million deposit and KRW 22 million monthly rent and KRW 2,200,000 from December 14, 2015, the Defendant arbitrarily prepared the lease agreement, stating “G” and “H” in the lessor’s column and had it in advance in his name.

G’s seal was affixed.

Accordingly, the Defendant forged one copy of the real estate lease agreement in the name of G, a private document on rights and obligations for the purpose of uttering.

B. Around December 1, 2016, the Defendant: (a) borrowed KRW 15 million from F from F to F; and (b) delivered one copy of the real estate lease agreement in the name of G forged as described in the foregoing paragraph, to F who knew of the forged fact; and (c) exercised the said agreement.

(c)

On December 1, 2016, the Defendant loaned KRW 15 million to the Victim F of the D Building, which he leased under the name of the Defendant, as collateral, to the Victim F, and the Defendant issued one copy of the G real estate lease agreement in the name of the Plaintiff, as described in the foregoing paragraph, to the effect that “The Defendant would pay 25% interest per annum and pay the principal by April 1, 2017,” and that “The Defendant would provide the Victim F with KRW 20,000,000 as security.”

However, in fact, D buildings seems to be written in writing in I and E indictments.

This common name was leased by the Defendant. Since the Defendant had approximately KRW 35 million personal debt, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay up to April 1, 2017, even if he borrowed KRW 15 million from the injured party.

The defendant deceivings the victim as above and borrowed money from the victim on the same day.