Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 7,000,000, and by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

Social welfare foundation E is a corporation established on July 21, 2005 and revoked its establishment on November 23, 2009; Defendant A was a director of the said corporation from the time of establishment of the said foundation to the time of revocation of its approval; Defendant B was the pro-friendly partner of the said corporation from the time of establishment of the said foundation to October 25, 2009.

[2013 High Court Decision 2463]

1. Preparation of qualification and personal document by the Defendants

A. On October 25, 2009, the Defendants conspired with the Defendants, at the office of social welfare foundation E located in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seoul, on or around December 31, 2009, without being entitled to the said corporate director’s qualification, and Defendant B borrowed the amount of KRW 150,000 (150,000) from the obligee’s creditor’s creditor’s creditor’s creditor’s creditor’s creditor’s creditor’s creditor’s column, stated “A” and “B of a social welfare foundation E” in the debtor’s name, and affixed the stamp of “A” to the social welfare foundation E.

As a result, for the purpose of exercising the rights in collusion, the Defendants drafted a copy of the monetary loan contract, which is a private document concerning rights and obligations, with the qualification of director of social welfare foundation E.

B. The Defendants conspired with each other on October 25, 2009 that Defendant B had already resigned from office on or around October 25, 2009, and thus, Defendant B was not entitled to directors of the said corporation on or around October 3, 2010.

At the same place as in Paragraph B, G made it necessary to prepare a statement to the effect that “The creditor shall borrow KRW 50,000,000 from A”, and made the creditor column enter “A Return” and “E Director B of Social Welfare Corporation” in the above letter column, and had the E seal affixed on the name of the above B.

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising the rights, the Defendants prepared a letter of non-performance, which is a private document concerning rights and obligations, by gathering the qualification of directors of social welfare foundation E.

2. The Defendants in collusion with the Defendants for the uttering of qualification-based private document at the same place as Paragraph 1(a) around July 22, 201.