The judgment below

Of them, the part of innocence against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 300,000 won.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant, who prepared a false lease contract to B, notified the court that he would receive a distribution if he applies for a report of right and a demand for distribution, can do so.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found this part of the facts charged as not guilty is erroneous and adversely affected by the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On November 201, Defendant A, at H Office Co., Ltd., the facts charged, despite well-known that L and C did not rent the above apartment from L and I, Defendant A prepared a false lease contract and notified the court that he would receive a distribution if he filed a report on the right and a request for distribution.

B and C filed a false report on rights and demand for distribution according to the method notified by Defendant A, as stated in the facts constituting a crime in the judgment below.

As a result, Defendant A aided and aided the auction obstruction of B and C by facilitating the crimes of B and C.

B. The lower court determined that: (a) the first investigation of B was conducted by the investigative agency; (b) stated that “A had talked about the demand for distribution and the report of lien in the H office around November 201, 201; (c) thereafter, the Defendant stated that “A Defendant should demand a distribution by telephone around December 201,” and changed part of the time and place; and (b) even at the first investigation agency, C had made a statement identical to B’s initial statement and stated that B had made a telephone call with such contents at the time of the change; and (d) the investigator stated that B had made a statement about the demand for distribution in the H office around November 201, 201.”