A defendant shall be punished by a fine of four million won.

When the accused does not pay a fine, 100,000 won shall be converted into one day.

Criminal facts

【In the order of time, the expression was written, and the Defendant received a favorable judgment against the Defendant in Seoul Southern District Court Decision 2008Gahap7711.

- In the case of Seoul Dong District Prosecutors' Office 2009 type 33556, the Seoul Southern District Court 2008Gahap7711, which reported the defendant by fraud in the lawsuit, the charge of crime was recognized on the ground that the certificate of borrowing KRW 700,000,000, which was the evidence of winning the judgment in the Seoul Southern District Court 2009 type 33556, was a false certificate of false borrowing, but the indictment was suspended considering

- Nevertheless, on May 28, 2018, the above winning judgment of the Defendant applied for a seizure and collection order of the claim amounting to KRW 1,271,890,410 as the claim amount against the third obligor of the victim in Incheon District Court 2018TTTT case 2018, 51033.

Accordingly, the defendant, by deceiving the court, received the order of seizure and collection against the third obligor of the victim's claim by the court, and 1,271,890,410 won of the claim amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. The result of examination of the defendant;

1. B Testimony;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to 700 million won and copies of each loan certificate;

1. Penalty provisions: Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act and selection of fines;

1. Attraction of a workhouse: In light of Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act, if only the damaged amount of the reason for sentencing, and the behavior in the facts of the crime, the application of the Special Act should be examined with a heavy emphasis on both the illegality of the act and the result. However, there are circumstances in which two parties claim a considerable amount of 400 million won loan certificate recognized as genuine.

(B) If there is a dispute over the extinction of 400 million won obligation between the two parties, and the existence of the obligation is not yet extinguished, and the accurate dispute over 400 million won obligation is not recognized, considering the circumstances surrounding the dispute over 400 million won obligation). The summary of the judgment on the defendant's and the defense counsel's argument is 700 million won loan certificate which is false