Defendant shall be punished by a fine of five million won.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

Punishment of the crime

On May 15, 2014, the Defendant was sentenced to six months of imprisonment and one year of suspended execution for fraud, etc. at the Cheongju District Court, which became final and conclusive on October 16, 2014.

On November 20, 199, the defendant lent 7 million won to the victim C with a multi-mediate deposit, and received a certificate of borrowing the loan from the victim under the name of the victim.

After the completion of the extinctive prescription of the above credit, the Defendant: (a) changed the date on which the above loan was borrowed and submitted it to the court to collect the above loan claim; and (b) decided that the payment order for the return of the loan belongs to the court; and (c) was issued to the victim.

1. On July 22, 2013, the Defendant: (a) stated the part of “199........ on the date of borrowing” on the loan certificate stating that “1,00,000 won shall be borrowed on November 20, 199’s name” in the name of “C” with a verification-type pen for the purpose of exercising the right at an irregular place; and (b) altered the victim’s certificate of borrowing money by stating “2003.......

2. Around July 22, 2013, the Defendant filed an application with the Cheongju District Court located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, a Gun court for a payment order for the return of the loan with respect to C, and submitted to the staff in charge of the court, whose name the above alteration is unknown, a certificate of loan borrowed in the name of C altered, as described in paragraph (1).

Accordingly, the defendant exercised the altered private document.

3. The Defendant: (a) around July 22, 2013, at the Cheongju District Court in the Cheongju District Court in the Cheongju District Court in the Chungcheongbuk-gun; and (b) on November 20, 2004, the Defendant’s credit on the Defendant’s credit on the victim was extinguished by the five-year extinctive prescription on November 20, 2004; and (c) the Defendant’s loan certificate submitted to the court was an altered document; (d) however, the Defendant applied for a payment order for the return of KRW 7 million against the victim C.