Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 300,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On May 15, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for fraud, etc. in Gangnam Branch Branch of the Chuncheon District Court, and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

The Defendant’s purpose is to exercise a report on the change of the construction participants (change of the construction work) in Gangnam-si, around 15:00 on January 18, 201, to exercise a report on the change of the construction participants (change of the construction work) in the building with the party D and E, which was being constructed as joint business operators.

1. One copy of the standard contract for private construction works in the name of the victim, who is a private document concerning rights and obligations, by affixing the seal of the victim affixed to a promissory note received by the victim from the victim, on the name of the victim in the column of the contract for private construction works, and forging the seal of the victim in the middle order;

1. At the I office located in Gangnam-si H, the standard contract form for private construction works in the victim’s name was submitted to the I office as above.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol regarding E;

1. Each police statement to J and K;

1. A complaint;

1. Each letter;

1. Promissory notes;

1. Proxy letter;

1. Each certificate of personal seal impression;

1. A standard contract for private construction works;

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to criminal records and investigation reports (not later than the previous disposition and report on results of confirmation);

1. Relevant Article 231 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense, the choice of punishment, and Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act;

1. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion on the provisional payment order under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the Defendant asserts that since D, one of joint business operators, has actually renounced the instant construction, it shall be deemed that he/she consented to the change of the construction work. However, the evidence duly admitted by this court.