A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

Punishment of the crime

On June 5, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years on June 13, 2013 by imprisonment with prison labor for a violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. Act (a collective crime, a deadly weapon, etc.), and the said judgment became final and conclusive on June 13, 2013.

1. Around August 10, 2012, B forged public document: (a) purchased at KRW 189 million on the condition that he/she takes over a deposit of KRW 150,000,000 for the deposit of KRW 100,000,000 for the deposit of KRW 401,00,000, which he/she owned by C; and (b) drafted a false sales contract again as if he/she re-sales it to the Defendant.

On August 20, 2012, the Defendant received a detailed statement of the occupancy household inspection of the above apartment from the Fdong Office of Busan, Seo-gu, Busan, and sent it to the above B, and around that time, the above B changed the E portion of the tenant in the details of the moving household inspection to knife the above apartment with the knife in order to look like the tenant in the above apartment.

Accordingly, the Defendant, in collusion with the above B, forged one copy of the statement of transfer household inspection under the name of the head of the Dong of the Seo-gu Busan Metropolitan City, which is an official document.

2. On August 20, 2012, the Defendant submitted the following: (a) around August 20, 2012, at the 13-dong, Nam-gu, Busan, the 1st and 3-dong, an employee in charge of lending submitted the detailed statement of the transfer household inspection, which was forged, to the employee

As a result, the Defendant, in collusion with the above B, exercised a detailed statement of transfer household inspection under the name of the head of the Dong of the Dong in Busan Metropolitan City, which is a forged official document.

3. On August 20, 2012, the Defendant was issued KRW 130 million as an apartment mortgage loan from an employee in charge of the above community credit cooperatives, who believed that he/she was true by submitting a forged transfer household inspection statement and a false sales contract (seller B and buyer A) as above, when he/she applied for a loan as security to the above apartment.

Accordingly, the defendant is against the above B.