A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

"2013 Highest 3487"

1. The Defendant forged private documents is a person who operated a cafeteria “C” restaurant located in the Nowon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Seocheon-gu, the Defendant already borrowed from the lessor D and provided it as security to the bond company. As such, when additional money was required in the state of borrowing and offering it as security, he/she acquired money by forging and using the real estate lease contract in the name of the said D.

On March 25, 2008, the Defendant stated in the column for indication of the real estate in the real estate lease contract site through the employees of the real estate agent office in the name-free name-based real estate agent office: “The location: the area: 24 square meters of the building in Bupyeong-gu, the area: the 24th square meters of the building; the monthly rent: the 0 million won: the d, the resident registration number: F, the address: F, and the telephone number: H: the Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G (hereinafter omitted); and the above D’s seal was affixed to the name which was arbitrarily dismissed.

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising, the Defendant forged one copy of the real estate lease contract in the name of D, which is a private document on rights and obligations.

2. On March 27, 2008, the Defendant: (a) provided, at the J office located in the law firm located in the original building 102 of the original building I, K with the said forged real estate lease agreement as if it were a document duly formed; (b) provided, as stated in the following Paragraph (3), the Defendant used the forged real estate lease agreement to K as a collateral.

3. In the time and place indicated in the above Paragraph 2 above, the fraud Defendant made a false statement to the effect that “a victim K who was aware of the said restaurant as a customer would be repaid within six months if he/she lent KRW 40 million to the said restaurant, which would be provided as a security for the real estate lease contract,” and that, in other words, a promissory note against the victim amounting to KRW 40 million was notarized at the seat.

However, in fact, the real estate lease contract provided by the defendant as a collateral was forged as above.