Defendants shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the Defendants did not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On August 25, 2016, around 11:25, the Defendants: (a) seized the claim KRW 11,700,000 from the Seoul Central District Court Order 2015 to the enforcement title of the claim for compensation order of KRW 11,70,000, the injured party B, the obligee of which was the obligee, to a tangible movable worth KRW 2,590,000; and (b) subsequently, for the purpose of evading this, the Defendants conspired the Defendant E to prepare a fair deed by pretending that the Defendant E had a debt despite the lack of a debt.

around September 12, 2016, the Defendants received a promissory note of KRW 100 million as of September 12, 2016, which was issued on September 19, 2016 at the H Office of Law Firm H, which is located in Seoul Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F Building G, as of September 12, 2016, and Defendant E attached to the said movable on September 26, 2016, which was subject to the execution of the said fair deed, thereby making the amount of dividends back to the victim out of the successful bid price for the said movable.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to commit a false debt with the intent to escape from compulsory execution, thereby damaging the victim as the obligee.

Summary of Evidence

1. A supplementary statement;

1. Investigation report (the details of telephone conversations with a witness I, a witness I, a telephone conversation with a witness), investigation report (Submission of suspect E data), investigation report (Submission of suspect E data), investigation report (2) and investigation report (the confirmation of the process of issuing the receipt of documents evidencing bonds submitted by suspect E);

1. Copies of the judgment (2015 Highest 6070).

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a copy of a process deed (No. 721),

1. Relevant Articles 327 and 30 of the Criminal Act and the Defendants’ choice of punishment concerning criminal facts: Articles 327 and 30 of the Criminal Act and the choice of fines

1. Defendants to be detained in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act / [Defendant E had had, with respect to the building of the J owned by Defendant A, undergo a test work of KRW 200 million in consideration of the construction cost in 2008, but received only KRW 100 million in consideration of the above construction cost from Defendant A and received only the remainder 100 million in consideration of Defendant A’s payment.