Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the former husband of D, who owned 301 Dong Dong-dong 301 in nuclear power, and E is the mother of D.

1. On May 10, 2013, the Defendant interfering with auction, along with E, prepared a lease contract stating that “E shall rent approximately 3 square meters, including the boiler, from D on October 30, 2012 to October 30, 2014, for lease deposit 20 million won and until October 30, 2014” with D’s creditor F (the maximum bond amount of KRW 30 million)’s application for a voluntary auction of the said 301, and submitted a written application for a report on the right under the said lease agreement to the Defendant, along with the lease contract agreement attached to “E, for the purpose of paying the deposit and the distribution of dividends,” and the Defendant submitted the said report on the lease deposit and the distribution of the said KRW 301, 301, the lease deposit, etc., to the said 301, Gangwon District Court, which was located in Suwon-dong Seoul Special Metropolitan City on May 24, 2013.”

However, in fact, E paid the lease deposit of KRW 20 million to D from October 30, 2012, and there was no rent of approximately 3 square meters, such as boiler, among the above 301 cases.

Accordingly, the defendant, in collusion with E, has harmed the fairness of auction by fraudulent means.

2. Forgery of private documents and the display of private documents;

A. On February 20, 2014, the Defendant stated that “E”, “E”, “5,000 won”, “5,046,00 won in the total amount of public funds”, and “the supply content column” in the supply content column as the receipt paper written by the Defendant’s supplier “I, J” and “E”, “E”, “E”, “5,046,000 won”, which reads “one half-huming heat, one bath, one facility, and installation cost,” which were parked on the street prior to the original branch of the Chuncheon District Court.

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising, the Defendant forged a receipt which is a private document concerning a certificate of fact in the name of J.

B. The Defendant.