A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Punishment of the crime

On November 2014, the Defendant had been filing a divorce suit with C, and had donated D 724 square meters and 9.4 square meters on the ground of the lightweight structure, the sand position plate, and 9.4 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to C, but had been involved in C and C for the purpose of hiding it and receiving more division of property and consolation money.

On December 9, 2014, the Defendant prepared a draft of complaint at the office of the Defendant located in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, and requested the social work personnel located in the office of Chungcheongnam-do to prepare a draft of complaint and affix their seals to the draft of complaint upon request.

The letter of complaint was that "C has forged a power of attorney to issue a certificate of personal seal impression without the consent of the defendant and E has forged a donation contract and completed the registration of ownership transfer of the real estate of this case."

However, in fact, the Defendant donated the instant real estate to C, and agreed to prepare the gift contract after receiving F's phone call from the secretary of the office of E judicial scrivener office.

Nevertheless, on December 10, 2014, the defendant received the above complaint directly to the public service center of the Chungcheong Police Station.

As a result, the defendant was made without the purpose of having C and E receive criminal punishment.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness C and F;

1. The police statement of the accused;

1. A complaint (a accompanied by relevant documents, such as a power imprint certificate);

1. A submitted data, a complaint, and a written application for provisional seizure of real estate are direct evidence of the facts constituting the crime as indicated in the written application, and C’s statement is credibility when considering the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court:

1. C’s statements in investigative agencies and this court are consistent and do not seem to be any particular contradiction.

On the other hand, the defendant has violated his obligation.