beta
Text
The Defendants publish the summary of the judgment on each of the Defendants not guilty.
Reasons
1. Summary of the facts charged “2011 Highest 1092”;
A. Defendant A is a person who operates a restaurant with the trade name “E” in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D.
On December 7, 2006, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the head of the house-based I on the “H” restaurant operated by the Defendant near the G Elementary School located in the Seoul Northern District, and with the head of the house-based I, with the deposit money of KRW 30 million, and entered into a lease agreement.
However, around December 27, 2006, the Defendant demanded the above I to “I want to obtain a loan from a bank, and prepare a fake lease agreement of KRW 45 million by raising the amount guaranteed to obtain a loan from a bank.” The above I demanded the Defendant to receive a deposit from the Defendant, and demanded the Defendant to prepare and submit a lease agreement and receipt of KRW 45 million at the request of the Defendant.
However, on March 7, 2007, the Defendant paid 7 million won to the above I with a deposit with a loan for the lease of money on March 7, 2007, and did not pay 45 million won in full.
Nevertheless, the Defendant, on October 2008, filed a lawsuit claiming the return of the lease deposit against the said I with the Seoul Northern District Court (Seoul Northern District Court) on the grounds that the lease deposit amount was in possession of the lease contract and receipt in KRW 45 million, and around October 2008, the Defendant had tried to file a false complaint with the said I for the purpose of having the said I receive the deposit amount of KRW 45 million from the said I and having the said I receive the said civil judgment disadvantageous to the Defendant.
The Defendant, around April 2010, received KRW 45 million from the public service center of the Gangnam Police Station located in Gangnam-gu Seoul, Seoul, 1, 415-15, and the Defendant, “Defendant I, despite the receipt of the deposit, shall in spite of his intention or ability to return the deposit when the lease contract was revoked or terminated.”