Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 10,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant was a person who had operated real estate enforcement and sales business with the name of “F” in Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, and the victim C is the owner of a hospital building in the Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.

On September 2010, the Defendant directly changed the above hospital building to an urban-type residential house and ordered the victim to sell the building in lots.

On the condition that the sales price shall be deposited from the damaged person to the new bank account in the name of the victim, the entire affairs of remodeling and selling buildings have been delegated.

Nevertheless, as the Defendant experienced difficulties in appropriating the construction cost on May 4, 201, the Defendant arbitrarily prepared a sale contract column in the column for sale purposes, “10,000,000 won”, “50,000 won” in the gold column, “50,000 won” in the column for the contract proceeds and the method for payment of the sale price,” “the bank column”, “G” in the bank column, “the bank column,” “G” in the bank column, “the bank column,” “the bank column,” “the seller’s name in the buyer column,” “C”, “name in the buyer column,” and “name in the buyer column,” “name in the buyer column,” and affixed C’s seal attached to C affixed to C’s name and affixed to C’s name.

As a result, the Defendant, without authority, forged and used one copy of the sales contract in the name of C, which is a private document on rights and obligations, from the above day to October 7, 201, and forged and exercised 25 copies of the sales contract in the name of C over a total of 25 times from the above day to the day on which October 7, 2011.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. The legal statement of the witness C;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion of the contract for the execution and the sale of lots, the text of the judgment (Seoul High Court, 2013Na 19252), and the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion were true that the Defendant forged 25 copies of the contract for the sale in the name of C (hereinafter “instant sale contract”), but the Defendant.