On May 6, 2009, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a crime, etc. at the Seoul Central District Court for the same year.

7.2.The decision became final and conclusive at all times.

[2013 Highest 6307] The fact was that the Defendant did not have any specific property on October 2008 and did not have the ability to take over the “Emart” operated D on the CB-1st floor of Yongsan-gu, Manyang-si (hereinafter “Em”). In order to borrow money through F, the Defendant induced F to jointly operate the said Emb in order to borrow money, and paid the down payment for the sale of the said Emb in cash, and paid the promissory note in an irregular manner to the victim as an intermediate payment and a balance, and had the right to operate the said Emb, sold the said Emb and had the said Emb to pay the said payment to D.

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

A. Although the Defendant did not have concluded a contract with D to take over the said marina around October 28, 2008, without authority for the purpose of exercising the said F to borrow money from the said F, the Defendant prepared the main text to the effect that the transferor D sells the “EE” to the “A” and “F” in the name of the “E” under the title of the “Comprehensive Business Transfer and Receipt Contract” using a computer at an unspecified place, and affixed a name tag in the date column “A” and “EE” on October 28, 2008.

Accordingly, the defendant forged a comprehensive business transfer and takeover contract in the name of D, which is a private document on rights and obligations.

B. The Defendant issued a forged comprehensive business transfer and takeover contract to F at the same place around that time, and exercised it.

2. On Nov. 1, 2008, the fraud Defendant: (a) held in the aforesaid marina office operated by the victim D on Nov. 21, 2008, that the victim D would want to operate the Etept; (b) held that the victim D would normally pay the purchase price; and (c) held that it would normally pay the purchase price, and (d) held that it would be the facility of the said Ept from the victim D.