A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Since December 2010, the Defendant constructed the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the building of the victim F, F,

On September 16, 2011, the defendant continued to demand repayment from the victims, and around September 16, 201 from the victim F Co., Ltd., the defendant, the principal debtor, is also likely to be subject to compulsory execution from the victims, as the defendant was subject to provisional seizure against the Cheongdong-gu J Nos. 1 and 101, the owner of the E-building building, the owner of the E-building building, based on joint and several liability claims.

Therefore, the Defendant, upon entering into a contract with Chungcheongnam-si on April 19, 2012, entered into a “K New Construction Corporation” and, in order to avoid compulsory execution, such as seizure of the claim for construction cost, which is the only property of the Defendant from the creditors, such as Co., Ltd. F, G, and H, and to secure the construction cost of the said construction site and the Defendant’s ability to repay L, the Defendant prepared a false notarial deed stating that L’s claim is excessively excessive unlike the real estate, and submitted the said notarial deed to obtain an order for the Defendant’s claim for the construction cost against the Defendant’s Chungcheong-si (hereinafter “creditor”).

On April 19, 2012, the Defendant submitted a false loan certificate with D Co., Ltd. (Representative A), creditor L, claim amount of KRW 1,700,000,000 to D Co., Ltd. (Representative A), creditor L, claim amount of KRW 1,70,00,00, which was run by the Defendant, to D Co., Ltd., which was run by the Defendant, even though he did not bear the obligation of KRW 1.7 billion.