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

1. Around April 15, 2008, the Defendant forged a private document: “D office located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government for transaction of real estate and indication of delegation articles: 2641m20m2, number of delegation articles: Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E, Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government for the sale and purchase of the above parcel number E, and the delegated address: The delegated address: The resident identification number of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government for the use of the computer: H: H, name and address of the delegated person: H, and resident identification number: H, Jongno-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government for the use of the document: I, name and address of the delegated person: A, and resident identification number: 1, 2008; and H’s seal arbitrarily affixed to H’s name of the printed power of delegation.

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising authority, the Defendant forged a letter of delegation of real estate transactions in H name, a private document on rights and obligations without authority.

2. On August 29, 2011, the Defendant presented the forged real estate transaction power to the J, who is aware of the forgery, as if it were a document duly formed.

3. Around August 29, 2011, the defrauded presented to the victimJ the power of attorney to trade real estate under H’s name with the Defendant as an agent, and concluded a pre-sale agreement to sell the land owned by Jongno-gu Seoul E to the victim and H for KRW 300 million.

However, the above power of attorney was forged by the defendant, and the defendant did not have the right to make a reservation for purchase and sale of the above land. Even if the price of the land was paid by the victim, the defendant did not have the intention or ability to conclude a sale contract under the name of the landowner and register the transfer of ownership

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as above, was accused of the victim and was given 30 million won as a pre-contract by the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused;

1. The police against K and L.