beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
The defendant, who is engaged in the building business, was in a de facto marital relationship with D from August 22, 2012 to June 2015, and E is a wife of D.
Around November 9, 2015, the Defendant drafted a written complaint against D and E using a computer in the office of an administrative library near the Yongsan-gu Office, Gyeong-gu, Gyeonggi-si, the Defendant: (a) stated that “Defendant D, who was living together and became aware of the creditors, would temporarily keep the borrowed name account of the complainant F; and (b) transferred KRW 156,00,000,000, which was in the accounts of the Agricultural Cooperative under F, to the Agricultural Cooperative under the name of Defendant D, the Defendant, the Defendant’s father, the Defendant’s father, opened and managed the borrowed name deposit account of KRW 100,000,00 in the name of Defendant D, the Defendant, the Defendant’s wife, and returned the borrowed name deposit account of KRW 100,000,000,000 in the name of the head of the Tong, and thus, would not be subject to punishment by making a false statement that the account was returned to the complainant.”
On November 9, 2015, the Defendant continued to receive the above written complaint from the civil petition office of the Innju Police Station at Sjuju City, 50,000, and on the same day, under the investigation of the Innju Police Station and the economic team office, the Defendant stated that “In the course of using the F account in the name of the Defendant, the creditors became aware of the borrowed account and required to deposit KRW 156 million by transferring the borrowed account in the name of his/her living woman D to the reduction bank account on January 6, 2014, even though he/she requested the return from April 2014, the Defendant did not return it as KRW 10,00,000, and the Defendant did not return it as KRW 100,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000 won, and as D opened the deposit account under the name
However, in order to avoid the creditor's compulsory execution, the defendant remitted 156 million won to the defendant-appellant's account in the name of the defendant-appellant to use the above money as follows. D did not request D to return KRW 156 million around April 2014.
(1) 63,316,130 won in relation to the defendant's lawsuit.