If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

1. From August 2009, the Defendant: (a) from around August 2009, the Defendant was an employee of “D”, a sales store of safe-to-facing items operated by the victim B in the name of the victim’s wife C; and (b) sold a facing test, etc. at the inner retail store in Seoul and Gyeonggi areas

On February 5, 2010, the Defendant collected KRW 270,000 from G office operated by the F in Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-si E, and used the money for the said victim’s business. The Defendant spent the money in mind at the place of the business.

In addition, the Defendant, from around that time to November 3, 2010, embezzled total of KRW 3,003,00 by the same method 14 times in total, as indicated in the “crime List” as indicated in the attached Table between around that time and around that time.

2. Forgery of private documents;

A. At around June 30, 2010, the Defendant stated in the column of the registration number of the supplier of the tax invoice for the person who was supplied with F in the G office operated by Young-si, Young-si, Young-si, F, D, name C, and place of business in the column of H, trade name column, C, and business location column in the Dong-gu, Gwangju Metropolitan City, I on June 30, 2010; the date of preparation; 245,454 in the supply value column; 24,54 in the tax amount column; and 24,546 in the tax amount column; and marked the Defendant’s seal.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a tax invoice in the name of C, which is a private document on rights and obligations.

B. On September 29, 2010, the Defendant: (a) stated in the column for registration number of the supplier of the tax invoice for the supplier supplied in H, trade name column D, name column C, and location column in H, trade name column; (b) stated inside the manufacturing industry and category column in Gwangju Metropolitan City-gu I; (c) the date of preparation column in the manufacturing industry and category column; (d) 395,454; and (e) 39,546 in the tax amount column; and (e) described the Defendant’s seal in C’s name.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a tax invoice in the name of C, which is a private document on rights and obligations.

3. The display of the above-mentioned investigation document;