Defendant

A Imprisonment for three years, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of 5,000,000 won.

Defendant

B The above fine.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B Directors of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”), Defendant A is a director of the victim limited-liability company H (hereinafter “victim company”), the subcontractor company of the said company, and the victim I is a representative director of the victim company, who was in an internal relationship with Defendant A from November 2003 to July 2010.

1. The Defendants’ co-principal

A. The defendant A, as a director of the victim company, had not received the consent from the victim company I, the representative director, on the part of the victim company's liabilities to G, or had not received delegation on the preparation of a written confirmation of the settlement of construction price.

Nevertheless, on May 7, 2013, the Defendants were able to prepare a false statement of the settlement of construction cost, and Defendant B sent to Defendant A a paper paper stating the contents to be prepared at Defendant A’s accommodation located in the Yong-Namnam-gunJ on May 7, 2013, and Defendant A prepared a written confirmation of the settlement of construction cost (hereinafter “written confirmation of the settlement of construction cost in this case”) with the content that the victim company would refund to G by using the computer according to the said contents, “78,931,819 won,” and “Confirmation (H) I,” and signed the said confirmation document.

As a result, the Defendants prepared one copy of the settlement certificate of construction cost, which is a private document concerning rights and obligations, with the intent of exercising the agent qualification in collusion.

B. On January 7, 2014, the Defendants submitted a written confirmation of the settlement of construction cost, which was prepared with qualification as referred to in the above paragraph (a), to a preparatory document as if they were normally prepared in relation to the case of unjust enrichment return filed by G against the victim company, and submitted it to a court employee in the name of non-existence of such fact.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired with each other.