"2015 Highest 629"

1. In early 2013, the Defendant: (a) lent promissory notes in the face value column from E, “F on December 31, 2012”; (b) the address of the place of issuance; (c) issuer “GE”; and (d) the due date, “2013” and offered them as security to I operating H, Inc., the Defendant’s creditor.

On December 2, 2013, the Defendant requested the above E to extend the payment date by telephone to 2014 years, but the Defendant was refused, and the Defendant directly sought E and requested it. On December 31, 2013, the Defendant found E’s office located in Daegu-gu K along with the J, a director of H, a corporation H, and entered the said E in the empty office before the arrival of the said office. Before the arrival of the said E, the Defendant entered the “3” portion of the payment date of the said Promissory Notes in the knife with the “3” portion in the knife, and entered the “4” with the verification color.

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising authority, the Defendant modified the entry on the rights and obligations of securities issued by E without authority.

2. The Defendant, at the time stated in paragraph 1, issued to J, who was waiting for another room of the said office, a revised promissory note and exercised it.

As alleged by the Defendant, even though J was aware of the fact of the alteration of the Promissory Notes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 76-80, Apr. 1, 2009) (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 81Du138, Apr. 2, 2009). As long as the J knew that the Promissory Notes would distribute the Promissory Notes of this case, it constitutes a crime of uttering of securities by alteration

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 81Do2492, Jun. 14, 1983). “2015Dadan1652, the Defendant is a representative director of LA.

L is a store in Daegu Northern-gu Ma with 116 commercial buildings owned by L and 500 commercial buildings leased by L as "N".