beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The Defendant, from 2008 to 2008, purchased land E (hereinafter referred to as “this land”) in the name of 125 million won from the land in the Gyeongsan-si from May 18, 2007 by borrowing KRW 100 million from the land owners, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of D.
On May 18, 2007, the day of the registration of ownership transfer, the Defendant created the right to collateral security equivalent to KRW 100 million on the creditor F, and on August 21, 2007, the right to collateral security equivalent to KRW 20 million on the said land respectively. On September 10, 2007, each agency did not pay property tax and insurance premium, and each agency seized the said land. On January 29, 2009, the Defendant borrowed KRW 195 million from the Busan Saemaeul Community Credit Cooperative from around 29, 2009, the Defendant created the right to collateral security equivalent to KRW 260 million on the maximum debt amount and purchased the said land at the time of purchase of the said land.
Nevertheless, if the Defendant purchased the above land to the victim H and I, he would terminate the right to collateral security set up on the above land, and he had the intention to acquire the money under the name of the purchase price.
1. Around August 25, 2009, the criminal defendant against the victim H made a false statement to the certified judicial scrivener office near the Gyeong-dong, Chungcheongnam-si, Chungcheongnam-si, and the victim H stating that “When he purchases part of the forest owned by the State (State) D, he/she was the representative of the Republic of Korea, he/she would terminate the right to collateral security in the name of Gyeong-dong, which was established on the land subject to sale with the purchase price.”
The Defendant alleged that there was no fact that the victim H expressed that he would be allowed to leave the factory, and the victim H made a statement to the same purport. As such, the Defendant appears to have never made the said statement.
However, the defendant was promoting the above (State) D at the time.