beta
Text
[Defendant A] The defendant A shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
[Defendant B] Defendant B shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.
except that this shall not apply.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
[2014 Highest 86]
1. On November 22, 2010, Defendant A forged a private document: (a) stated in the form of the real estate pre-sale contract that “G rents a deposit of KRW 130,000,000,000,000 to the G for the purpose of exercising the right and duty of H, for the purpose of using it at the G’s house located in Yongsan-gu, Yongsan-gu; and (b) stated in the lessor’s column that “A shall rent a deposit of KRW 130,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 won; (c)
2. Defendant A continued to exercise the above investigation document, as if the above forged real estate charter contract was duly formed, Defendant A delivered it to G and exercised it.
3. On the same day, Defendant A presented a forged real estate charter agreement with the victim G at the house of the above G on the same day, and concluded that “H, the owner of the I’s house in the Gyeonggi-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Gyeonggi-gu, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, was friendly, and was delegated the right to rent the house in the local area.” The above house was the former lessee’s residence in the deposit amount of KRW 150 million, and it was false that the former lessee would be able to lease the deposit amount of KRW 130 million.”
However, the fact was that H did not have a friendly relationship with the Defendant, and around December 28, 2006, the Defendant introduced the Plaintiff to H as a building with high investment value as a prospective redevelopment area, and then, H invested 30 million won in cash, borrowed 163 million won in the name of H, and acquired the above real estate under the Defendant’s responsibility under the condition that it resells it. As such, H did not have the right to lease the above real estate at his own discretion without the consent or ratification at the time of the instant lease contract, the Defendant did not have the right to lease the above real estate. Since J and K et al. leased before the Plaintiff leased the leased housing of 75 million won, all of which were leased by the victim and were in a state of non-leased. Thus, the former lessee is able to lease the real estate.