Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,500,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 21, 2014, the Defendant forged a private document: (a) at the C judicial scrivener office located in B at Papo City B at Papo City on October 21, 2014; (b) as if the victim D did not consent to the cancellation of his/her right, the Defendant did so without the victim’s consent; and (c) presented documentary evidence and documentary evidence of establishment, such as the victim’s name to employees working at the same place; and (d) made the said employee delegate all acts concerning the application for registration and withdrawal of the building E 112 at Papo City E Ma 112; and (c) made the delegated person’s signature and seal on his/her name on the letter of delegation with the color pen to the effect that he/she delegates all acts concerning the application for registration and withdrawal of the building.

Accordingly, the defendant has forged a letter of delegation in the name of the victim, which is a private document on rights and obligations for the purpose of uttering.

2. The Defendant, at the time of the day indicated in paragraph (1), had a certified judicial scrivener staff as defined in paragraph (1) apply for registration of cancellation of a nearby mortgage, and exercised the forged power of attorney to the above registered registry official who is aware of the forgery, as described in paragraph (1).

3. The Defendant had a certified judicial scrivener employee apply for registration of cancellation of collateral mortgage as stated in paragraph 2 at the time, place, and as stated in paragraph 2, the Defendant entered the electronic records, such as the public electronic records, into the electronic records, and entered the electronic records so that registration of cancellation of collateral mortgage can be completed on the register of real estate as stated in paragraph 1, and the registration of cancellation of collateral mortgage was kept on the register of real estate.

As a result, the defendant made a false report to the public official to record false facts in the building register of electronic records identical to the original copy of the process deed, and had him keep the building register with the record of false facts.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The police of D. D.