Act on the Uttering of Investigation Documents, Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder's Name

violation of applicable rate

Residence and Busan Shipping Daegu

Busan District Court

Of the facts charged in this case, the fraud against ○○ among the facts charged in this case was committed on or around February 12, 2008, each private document was committed on or around April 10, 2008, the uttering of each private document on April 10, 2008, the uttering of each private document forgery and the uttering of the private document on May 8, 2008, the forgery of the private document and the uttering of the private document on May 13, 2008, and the uttering of each private document forgery and the private document on May 15, 2008, respectively.

On December 4, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of larceny, fabrication of private documents, etc. at the Busan District Court, and three years of suspended execution, which became final and conclusive on April 8, 2010. On June 16, 2010, the Defendant was sentenced to one year and six months of imprisonment with prison labor and three years of suspended execution on April 8, 201.

1. Larceny;

(a) thief against the victim’s book ○○;

At around 12:00 on September 2, 201, the Defendant: (a) placed in the “OOOOOO’s clothing store operated by the victim ○○○○○○○○○ department store in Busan, Daegu, ○○○○○○○○ store; (b) placed an order of clothes to both ○○○○, which is the cause of the occupation, and the two ○○○ found the goods; (c) placed in the store, the Defendant stolen the Defendant’s lubet, which was 439,00 won at the market price of the victim’s possession, displayed in the store, and put it into one room after being placed in one room.

(b) thief against the victim ○○○○;

On September 23, 201, the Defendant: around 13:20 on September 23, 201, at the '0000' clothing store operated by the victim ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, which was located on the third floor of the Dong-gu, Busan, the Defendant stolen the Defendant by putting one punishment equivalent to KRW 219,00 of the market price of the victim’s possession into a household, between the Defendant and the Defendant’s eyeping one eye.

(c) Larceny against victim maximum ○○○;

On March 201, 201, the Defendant, at the seat of the "law firm ○○○○○, a representative attorney-at-law" office located in the Busan Metropolitan Government ○○○○○, the victim, prepared and kept around May 201, stolen two copies of the draft of the "written complaint against Hu○○, which was in custody," and then stolen them. From around that time to June 201, the Defendant, with various documents owned by the victim, as stated in the attached list of crimes.

2. Fraud;

(a) Fraud against the victim's new 00

From November 2006 to February 2, 2007, the Defendant: (a) '000000, operated by the Victim NewO located in the Busan Blue-gu 00000 apartment complex; (b) the Defendant’s child, 00; and (c) although the Defendant did not intend to normally pay the membership fee even if ○○ was enrolled in the above child care center, the Defendant did not normally pay the membership fee; (d) the Defendant did not pay the above ○○ and ○○ registered in the above child care center and did not pay the sum of KRW 1,372,00,000 in total, including the admission fee, special activity expenses, etc.; and (e) obtained pecuniary benefits equivalent to the same amount.

(b) Fraud against the victim stuffs;

On March 25, 2011, the Defendant acquired financial benefits equivalent to 100,000 won by deceiving the victim's gambling ○, even though the Defendant did not intend to pay the cost even after having received the written diagnosis of injury. However, even if the Defendant did not intend to pay the cost in a normal manner, the Defendant did not pay 10,000 won even after having received the written diagnosis of injury from the victim.

C. Fraud against ○○○○

Around June 9, 2011, the Defendant: “OOOO operated by ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○,” and the Defendant acquired a pecuniary benefit equivalent to the same amount, on the ground that the Defendant did not pay medical expenses for the treatment of the Defendant and the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, even

3. Embezzlement;

On March 22, 2011, when the Defendant received a request from the victim Lee ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, 0000 won from the Defendant, the Defendant: “In order to lend money, the Defendant: (a) confirmed the borrower’s identity clearly; (b) provided one copy of the Plaintiff’s registration certificate; (c) provided one copy of the Plaintiff’s identity certificate; (d) one copy of the Plaintiff’s personal seal impression; and (e) one copy of the Plaintiff’s driver’s license; and (e) provided the said documents on March 22, 2011 and kept the said documents for the victim; and (e) received a request from the victim to return the money at a coffee hotel located in Busan ○○○○○○○, Busan ○○, Daegu, 19:00 on March 23, 201; and (e) rejected the request from the victim to return the money at another place where the said documents were embezzled.”

4. Forgery of private documents and the display of private documents;

(a) Crimes committed on January 18, 2007 relating to the registration of establishment of a mortgage on the part of a chonsegwon;

Around September 2004, the Defendant requested the ○○○ school and the ○○○ who is a person living together with the ○○○○○, thereby completing the registration of chonsegwon on the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ on October 25, 2006. On October 26, 200

Accordingly, around January 18, 2007, the defendant stated in his office ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, without authority, for the purpose of exercising the right and duty, the defendant forged the above contractual document under the name of ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, with the above title of title 18.

(b) Crimes related to the registration of cancellation of the right to lease on a deposit basis on December 14, 2007;

On December 14, 2007, the defendant, at the office of a certified judicial scrivener 0000 office located in Busan District Court 0000, Busan District Court on December 14, 2007, stated the '○○○' and DoOOC in the column of the right to registration of the delegated letter using a computer network project operator without authority for the purpose of exercising the right, and affixed the seal of the above ○○○○○○ who held the above ○○○○○○○○○'s name in advance and affixed the seal of the above ○○○○○○○○○'s name, and forged one copy of the power of attorney, which is a private document on the rights and obligations in the above ○○○○○○○○○○○○○'s name. On December 14, 2007, the public official in charge of not knowing the forgery of the above right to lease on a deposit basis, who applied for the cancellation of the above right to lease on a deposit basis and exercised the forged power of attorney.

On April 1, 2008, the Defendant stated that “the delegation letter” using a computer network protocol without authority for the purpose of exercising the right and duty at the joint office of ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, and “the maximumO” in each of the persons liable for registration of the termination certificate, and “the Gyeonggi-do-do-do-do-do-si-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-U-do-U-S-do-U-S-do-U-do-U-S-do-U-S-do-U-do-U-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do-do.

5. Performance of official duties.

Around 19:40 on December 12, 201, the Defendant presented to the Defendant a warrant for search and seizure at the residence of the Defendant, Busan Shipping Daegu ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, an investigator belonging to the Busan District Prosecutors’ Office, and explained the purport of the search and seizure to the Defendant, and during the search and seizure of his residence, the Defendant carried out one portable information storage device (USB; hereinafter referred to as the “USB”) at the dwelling space around 20:20 on the same day, and ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ ○○○○ ○○○ ○○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○○ ○ ○○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ ○ 200 mick, and the Defendant’s ○ ○ ○ m.

6. Violation of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name;

A. Title trust with respect to gambling ○

On May 15, 2008, the Defendant had an employee in charge of registration on name in accordance with the title trust agreement with Park Jong-gu, Busan District Court's Geum-gu, 424-1, Busan District Court's Geum-gu, 000 land and buildings purchased by the Defendant, completed the registration of ownership transfer for sale on May 15, 2008 under the name of Park Jong-gu, Busan District Court's gold-gu, 424-1.

B. Title trust to Do○○

(1) On March 20, 2009, the Defendant had a staff in charge of the registration of ownership transfer on the name in accordance with the title trust agreement with the head of Ku-gu, Busan District Court on March 20, 2009, for the land and building purchased by the Defendant on March 20, 200, for the land and building for 000,000, which was purchased by the Defendant, completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 9, 2009 under the name of Ku-○○.

(2) On October 21, 201, the Defendant, at the Busan District Court’s Dong Branch Branch’s office located in Busan District Court, Busan District Court’s 1133, had the Defendant completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of sale on September 22, 2011, by making the employee in charge of registration on his name in accordance with the title trust agreement with (i) UCOO1 purchased, as an employee in charge of registration on the ground of sale on September 22, 2011.

Summary of Evidence

fact of No. 1-A

1. Statement of the accused in the third protocol of trial;

1. Statement of police statement on ○○○ (including the part concerning the statement on ○○○);

Section 1-B of the Judgment

1. Statement of the accused in the third protocol of trial;

1. Statement of the police statement on ○○○;

Section 1-C.

1. The statement of the witness ○○ in the fourth trial record; and

1. Statement made by each prosecutor on the ○○○ and the ○○○;

1. A copy of the Statement dated December 16, 201, respectively, of the largest ○○○;

Section 2-A of the Judgment

1. Statements made by new witnesses in the fourth protocol of the trial;

1. Statement made by the prosecution concerning the new00;

1. An investigation report (verification of unit price for childcare fees, etc. for 2006);

Section 2-B of the Judgment

1. The defendant's partial statement in the third protocol of trial;

1. Statement of the prosecutor's statement concerning Ansan;

1. A criminal investigation report (Attachment to medical treatment sets for 00);

Section 2-C. of the Judgment

1. The defendant's partial statement in the third protocol of trial;

1. Statement of each prosecutorial statement concerning ○○;

Facts No. 3

1. The defendant's partial statement in the third protocol of trial;

1. Statement of each prosecutorial statement concerning ○○;

Facts No. 4

1. Each legal statement of the witness least 00 and O;

1. Statement of prosecutorial statement concerning ○○○;

Facts of Decision 5

1. Statement of the accused in the third protocol of trial;

1. Statement of prosecutorial statement concerning ○○;

1. A written statement of the leastO and the astronomicalO;

Facts of Decision 6

1. Statement of the accused in the third protocol of trial;

1. Statement made by the prosecution on ○○○, Do○, and Lee ○○;

1. Statement made by the prosecution against 00;

1. Investigation report (verification of the details of trading by 000000);

Criminal records of the judgment

1. Application of investigation report (a summary of judgment ○○) Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 329 of each Criminal Act, Article 347(1) of each Criminal Act, Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act, Article 231 of each Criminal Act, Articles 234 and 231 of each Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of each Criminal Act, Article 7(1) and Article 3(1) of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (the point of fraud), Article 347(1) of each Criminal Act, Article 231 of each Criminal Act, Article 234 and Article 231 of each Criminal Act, Article 136(1) of each Criminal Act,

1. Commercial competition;

Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act (mutual between the crimes of uttering of documents for investigation on January 18, 2007, and between the crimes of uttering of documents for investigation on April 1, 2008, and between the crimes of obstruction of performance of official duties)

1. Selection of punishment;

Each Imprisonment Selection

1. Handling concurrent crimes;

The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Articles 37 (former part), 38 (1) 2, and 50 of the Criminal Act

Judgment on Defendant’s argument

1. Theft against the maximum extent of the victim ○○;

A. The Defendant asserts that, on May 201 and June 201 of the same year, in the course of moving the victim’s office room (hereinafter “instant documents”), documents entered in the criminal facts (hereinafter “instant documents”) were brought to the Defendant’s office under the direction or permission of the victim.

B. According to the above evidence, the victim stated that the defendant was no longer in custody in the investigative agency and the attorney-at-law office consistent in this court and that the documents of this case were no longer in accord with the documents of this case. The documents of this case appear to be documents necessary to identify the status of the victim's property or to find out the victim's criminal records, etc., the fact that the defendant stolen the documents of this case owned by the victim can be sufficiently recognized. The defendant's assertion is without merit.

2. Crimes of forging private documents under the name of the largest○○○ and of uttering of falsified private documents;

A. The defendant, with the consent of the victim, asserts that he completed the registration identical to the facts constituting the crime (hereinafter referred to as the "registration of this case"), and asserts that ○○ does not have consented to the registration of this case to the defendant.

B. According to the evidence mentioned above, it is recognized that ○○, the husband of ○○○, obtained a certificate of personal seal impression on behalf of ○○○ on November 7, 2006, for the purpose of “transfer of chonsegwon” on behalf of ○○○○ on behalf of ○○○○ on behalf of ○○○.

On the other hand, ○○○ and ○○○ stated that the Defendant rejected the registration of chonsegwon from the Defendant on the ground that it was not possible twice after receiving the request from the Defendant to lend the name of the right to lease on a deposit basis, and that the Defendant received a certificate of personal seal impression and sent it to the Defendant. On September 2004, the Defendant received a letter from the Defendant that he would not dispose of the right to lease on a deposit basis under the name of 00 million won in the name of 00, and would not dispose of the right to lease on a deposit at his own. As examined below, the Defendant took various measures to guarantee his claim by lending the right to lease on a deposit basis to the ○○○○○○○○○○○, as well as taking various measures to ensure his claim in a variety of ways. On October 26, 2006, when completing the registration of chonsegwon on the instant apartment on a deposit basis, it did not take any way to guarantee his claim, and even if ○○○○ does not have any interest in the right to lease on a deposit.

Reasons for sentencing

1. Preferential factors for sentencing;

It was agreed with the victim of the larceny of this case, ○○ and ○○○, the victim of the larceny of this case, and ○○, ○○ and ○○, the victim of the larceny of this case, did not want to punish the defendant.

- The crime of forging each private document against the maximum ○○○ and the crime of uttering of a falsified private document does not cause substantial damage to the maximum ○○.

The defendant adopted his own children to the surrounding people, "the number of universities", "the person is a woman within his personal ability", "the person is a woman within his personal ability," and "the person is a male will", and used it for his criminal activities. This behavior of the defendant shows a well-being and an attitude to brutly understand the situation when there is a conflict with others, it is not possible to understand the situation when there is no consideration for others, it is intended to use it for others, and it is similar to the symptoms of "the person's own personality", "the person's own personality", "the person's own personality", and it appears that a considerable number of the crimes of this case are caused by the defendant's own personality disorder.

2. Unfavorable elements of sentencing;

The Defendant committed the instant crime, such as larceny, even though he/she was under probation due to theft, fabrication of private documents, etc., as in the previous record of the judgment.

Although the Defendant could not become an employee of the law office during the period during which the period of suspension of execution, he prepared an annual salary contract and acted at sight as an employee of the law office, who is an employee of the law office (and even after being requested by this ○○○○ to lend KRW 30 million from this ○○, the Defendant was unable to move to the wind to give up ○○○’s lending of e-mail by preparing an employment contract with Lee○○, documents related to the transfer of deposit and deposit, medical device transfer contract, monetary loan loan contract amounting to KRW 30 million, etc. In addition, it is similar to the method of preparing a loan certificate and a letter between the ○○○ and the largest ○○○, and preparing a written employment contract, etc.), the Defendant denied the criminal intent without paying the child-care center fees, and interfere with the search and seizure of seized goods and damage the legal order.

While the Defendant asserts that this case occurred in the process of realizing the connection between the incumbent attorney-at-law and the legal profession, the Defendant himself/herself is sacrificeing. However, the first instance of this case is rather than having tried to realizing the connection between the legal profession, and the chief prosecutor, etc., who was aware of the criminal issues between himself/herself and the least ○○○, tried to send a letter to the chief prosecutor, etc. as if he/she had been aware of many points about the criminal issues between himself/herself and the chief prosecutor, etc., but it appears that the chief prosecutor, who was addressed by the Defendant,

Parts of innocence

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. The part on fraud against ○○

Around 207-2008, the Defendant borrowed 5,500,000 won from ○○○ to ○○○○, the head of a branch of a bank, and demanded that the Defendant repay the above 5,500,000 won. On July 13, 2011, the Defendant paid the above 5,50,000 won to ○○○○○, 000 apartment-dong 00,000 (hereinafter referred to as “the instant ○○ apartment-dong 00”) to ○○, 00,000,000 won to 10,000 won to 20,000 won to 20,000 won to ○○○○○, a 30,000,00 won to 20,000 won to 20,000 won to 30,01,000 won to 20,000 won to 20,000 won to 1.7.

Since ○○○ does not actually reside in the above apartment, on September 15, 2011, the Defendant: (a) revoked the registration of the establishment of chonsegwon in the name of ○○○○○; and (b) subsequently, (c) had ○○○ obtain a new registration of the establishment of chonsegwon in the name of 200,000,000; (b) the Defendant returned KRW 197,926,620, which was deducted management expenses, etc. from KRW 200,000,000, which was paid to ○○○○○○, deducted management expenses, etc. from KRW 2,073,380.

As a result, the Defendant had been well aware of the fact that the claim against ○○ does not exist any longer, but continued to hold the above Notarial Deed without returning it to ○○○○ on July 14, 2011. Accordingly, the Defendant had expressed a false claim based on the notarial deed of this case where the cause claim was extinguished, thereby deceiving the court to enforce compulsory execution on ○○’s property.

Accordingly, on September 28, 2011, the Defendant: (a) applied for the seizure and collection order of the claim against the wage claim against the largest ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ on the basis of the instant notarial deed; (b) obtained the seizure and collection order of the above loan claim on September 29, 201, by deceiving the above court on September 29, 201, (c) obtained the seizure and collection order of the said loan (Dasan District Court Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch Branch) on September 29, 201; (d) obtained the above seizure and collection order of the loan claim on October 4, 201, by having the head of ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○.

(b) Crimes related to documents under the name of yellow○;

(1) Crimes related to the purchase of real estate on April 10, 2008

The Defendant, who came to know at the parents' gathering, used the name of Yellow ○, an instructor 000, to make a registration of transfer of ownership of the real estate ○○○○○○○○ (hereinafter referred to as “the real estate ○○○○”).

이에 따라 피고인은 2008. 2. 12.경 부산 연제구 ○○○○○○ ○○빌딩 1층에 있는 법무사 ○○○ 사무소에서, 행사할 목적으로 권한없이 컴퓨터 워드프로세서를 이용하여 '부동산매매계약서'라는 제목으로 매매대금란에 '일금 일억구천만원정 (₩190,000,000원정)', 매수인란에 'OO', 주민등록번호란에 '00000000', 주소란에 '부산광역시 사상구 00000000000000'을 기재하고 위 황00의 이름 옆에 미리 조각하여 소지하고 있던 황○○의 도장을 찍어, 위 황○○ 명의의 권리의무에 관한 사문서인 부동산매매계약서 1부를 위조하고, '위임장'이라는 제목으로 '등기권 리자'란에 '황00 부산광역시 사상구 000000)'을 기재하고 위 황이의 이름 옆에 황00의 도장을 찍어 위 황00 명의의 권리의무에 관한 사문서인 위임장 1부를 위조하고, 2008. 4. 10. 부산 금정구 장전동 424-1에 있는 부산지방법원 금정등기소에서 그 위조 사실을 모르는 담당 공무원에게 위 황○○ 명의로 이 사건000 부동산의 소유권이전등기를 신청하면서 위와 같이 위조한 부동산매매계약서 및 위임장을 마치 진정하게 성립한 것처럼 건네주어 행사하였다.

(2) A crime relating to the unauthorized Opening of an O bank account in the name of 00 O bank on May 8, 2008

The Defendant, while moving the real estate of 0000,000 in Busan Geum-gu, from the name of YO to YO, was doing so by using a yellow 00 driver’s license, which was acquired through an influen route in order to pretend that real estate purchase price has been actually paid, and is yellow ○.

The ○○ bank account opened and used the ○ bank account in the name of ○○.

Accordingly, on May 8, 2008, the Defendant, at the point of 0000 ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, the Defendant, without authority, entered “YOO” in the name column of the application for deposit and trust transaction using a verification-type pen, “0000 in the resident registration number column,” and “1000000 in the address column,” and affixed the seal of 00 prior custody in the above name and seal of 00 in the above yellow 00, thereby forging one copy of the application for deposit and trust transaction, which is a private document with respect to the rights and obligations under the above name of ○○○○○, and immediately knowing that the forgery was forged, the Defendant exercised it as if the application for a forged trust transaction was duly formed.

(3) Crimes related to the application for issuance of certificates of seal imprint on May 13, 2008

In order to sell the instant ○○ real estate, the Defendant once again misappropriationed the name of the ○○○○○ to issue a certificate of seal impression.

Accordingly, on May 13, 2008, at the Busan Dong-dong Busan Dong-dong, Busan 824-122, the defendant stated "Yeong○○ ○○ ○○ on June 30, 2009 in the applicant column of "an application for issuance of a certificate of seal imprint using a verification color pen without authority for the purpose of exercising the right." On May 13, 2008, the defendant used one copy of the application for issuance of a certificate of seal imprint, which is a private document on the rights and obligations under the name of Yellow ○○, by arbitrarily signing on the name of the above Yellow ○○ ○○, and exercised as if the above application for issuance of a certificate of seal imprint was duly concluded.

(4) Crimes related to the sale of real estate on May 15, 2008

On May 14, 2008, the defendant stated "00 million won (190,000,000)" in the purchase price column of "real estate sales contract using a certified judicial scrivener 00 office located in Busan-gu ○○○○○○○○○○○ building without authority for the purpose of exercising the right and duty," "O00,000 in the seller's name column," "O00 in the resident registration number column," "O00 in the address column," "O00,000 in the Busan-dong District Court," "O00, 14 May 2008, 200," and "10,000,000,000,0000, Busan-do 00,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,00,00,00,00.

2. Determination;

A. Determination on the part on fraud against maximum 00

(1) The key issue of the instant case is whether the instant notarial deed was falsely prepared and invalid in collusion with the Defendant by the ○○○○○, and whether the settlement was completed on September 15, 201 between the Defendant and the ○○○○○ in relation to the pre-tax agreement.

(2) Comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court as to whether the ○○○○ apartment was null and void as a joint and several surety agreement between the Defendant and the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○. 10 billion won, the Defendant transferred his right to lease on April 27, 201 to ○○○○○○○ apartment on July 1, 201. 2, the Defendant found the 10 billion won to be the ○○○○○○○○ apartment 200000 won prior to the first of July 201, the 2000 ○○○○ apartment 2000 won prior to the first of 2000 won prior to the second of 200 million won prior to the second of 3rd apartment, and the 10000 won prior to the second of 2000 won prior to the second of 3rd apartment, the Defendant and the 1000 billion prior to the second of 3rd apartment.

Until the contract for the lease on a deposit basis is terminated, 30,000 won (in the event of an increase or decrease in the monthly rent due to an amendment to the contract thereafter), management expenses, taxes and public charges, etc. as of the relevant materials, and in case of loss in the return of the deposit for lease on a deposit basis in violation of this provision, the obligor shall compensate for the amount of the loss, i.e., the obligor, and the obligee may also enforce compulsory execution on the property of the obligor and the joint guarantor without any separate anti-private procedure due to the effect of compulsory execution identical to the authentication of this agreement," and "........., before the date of the relevant agreement, before July 14, 2011, the obligee and the obligor shall not be held liable for any civil or criminal liability after the mutual settlement between the two parties, and 7, ○○○ is not recognized as having moved into the apartment house of this case with no ○○ apartment, a real estate agent for the lease on a deposit basis after the completion of the registration of the lease on a deposit.

In light of the following circumstances revealed by the above facts, i.e., ① the last 00 apartment in this case was completed the registration of the establishment of chonsegwon in order to actually reside in the apartment in the apartment in this case, ② the last ○○○ concluded a lease contract at the middle of official seal and completed the registration of the establishment of chonsegwon, and ② the document of rent, agreement, and agreement between the defendant and the defendant as well as the last ○○○○ made the notarial deed in this case. The contents are considerably detailed and detailed, so it does not seem to have been made for false conspiracy, and ③ the last ○○○ was working as the head of a bank at the time, and it is deemed that the meaning of the above agreement, etc. could have been well understood, it is reasonable to deem that the notarial deed in this case was made in order to preserve the claim amount of 200 million won loaned to the last ○○○○.

(3) Next, in full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court as to whether settlement has been completed on September 15, 201 between the Defendant and the ○○○○○○○○○○○, the real estate agent of the 00-authorized brokerage office sought Kim○○○ at the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○’s request. ② Accordingly, the 00-authorized brokerage office decided to terminate the right of lease on a deposit basis with the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ on September 15, 201. ③ Accordingly, the Defendant, ○○○○, ○○○○○, and ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○, 60-60-60-60-60-60-60-60-67-600-67-600-607-7-6007-7-60007-77-70007-7777.

In full view of the foregoing facts, it is reasonable to deem that the obligation based on the instant notarial deed between the Defendant and the ○○○○○ should be borne by the largest○○○○○ upon cancelling the registration of the establishment of chonsegwon on September 15, 2011, and the Defendant stated on the back of the instant notarial deed the phrase “the deposit deposit return amount.” In short, it is difficult to deem that the obligation and obligation based on the instant notarial deed has been settled in entirety.

(4) If so, this part of the facts charged against the defendant constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted pursuant to the latter part of Article 325

(b) Crimes related to documents in the name of 00;

(1) The Defendant asserts that, with the consent of ○○○, the act as described in the facts charged does not constitute a crime.

(2) On May 8, 2008, ○○ Bank’s deposit and trust transaction application form with ○○○○’s driver’s license is accompanied by a copy of ○○○’s license. On May 13, 2008, ○○○○ was issued a certificate of personal seal impression at ○○○○○○○○○○○○ Center with the Busan Dong-dong, Busan, on April 13, 2008, and Y○○ was stolen on or around April 2008, and was reissued on or around December 30, 2009. Accordingly, the issue of this part of the facts charged is whether the Defendant committed a Y○○○○○○’s driver’s license with the said deposit transaction application and issued the certificate of personal seal impression.

The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court: ① Yellow 00 was put in a handbagbbbbbbbbbba, and was put in a handbag. Around April 2008, it was difficult to put the handbag in the handbag and put in a toilet for 2-3 occasions when the defendant visited the house of the defendant around April 2008. At that time, the defendant took his driver's license. ② Yellow ○ was not aware that he lost his driver's license. ② On January 25, 2009, he did not know that he was aware of Japan's travel but did not cause inconvenience in daily life, and thus, he was stated to have been reissued his driver's license on December 30, 209, and he was given a new driver's license on December 14, 2008. ③ The driver's license was renewed on March 28, 2009.

For the foregoing reasons, if ○○ lost his/her driver’s license, he/she shall be deemed to have known of it when he/she was subjected to the disposition of suspension of license, or when he/she was under the police, so it is difficult to believe that ○○○ lost his/her driver’s license on April 2008 and became aware of it on January 2009, and further it is difficult to recognize that ○○ lost his/her driver’s license. Therefore, this part of the facts charged on the premise that the Defendant stolen ○○’s driver’s license and exercised ○○○, cannot be deemed to have proven a crime.

(3) This is ① Around May 14, 2008, the power of attorney and the seller column of the sales contract for ○○○○○○○○○ Real Estate affixed a yellow seal impression. The fact that the seal imprint appears to have the same as that of ○○○○○○’s seal imprint (in addition to the statement of ○○○○, it does not prove that the seal imprint is different from that of ○○○○○○’s seal imprint), ② he stated that ○○ does not lose her seal imprint; ③ on May 13, 2008, ○○○○○○ Office issued at 6, Busan, issued a 00 person’s seal imprint. Furthermore, 00 in charge of issuing the above seal imprint was aware of the fact that ○○○○○○○○○○○ was an applicant’s personal identification card, and that ○○○○○○○ was aware of the fact that ○○○○○ was issued with a 200-man’s signature.

(4) If so, without the consent of Yellow 00, this part of the facts charged that the defendant stolen the name of Yellow ○○ constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, the defendant is acquitted under the latter part of Article 325 of the