A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Criminal facts

On February 15, 2012, the Defendant failed to repay the amount equivalent to KRW 42,00,000 to B, and applied to Incheon Gyeyang-gu Incheon District Court E for auction with respect to D on December 20, 2012. On December 20, 2012, the obligor F failed to repay the amount equivalent to KRW 165,493,703 to Hyundai Switzerland Savings Bank, Inc., the obligor F applied for auction to the Incheon District Court G for auction of the same real estate, and the auction was conducted to prevent this, the Defendant did not intend to report the right based on a false lien, even though there was no fact that the construction work was conducted in the form of standard construction contract for the construction work.

1. On November 2013, the Defendant forged private documents, using a computer located therein in Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City H 402, stating in the name of the construction, “in-house interior and outside the construction (large repair),” “In Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City D” in the construction site column, “day-day KRW 133,80,000” in the contract amount column, “I, J, K” in the contractor column, “A, L, M” in the contractor column, and “I, L, and date of preparation” as of January 10, 201, the Defendant arbitrarily affixed the said I’s seal in his name.

Accordingly, the defendant, for the purpose of uttering, forged a standard contract for private construction works in the name of I, a private document on rights and obligations.

2. On November 25, 2013, the Defendant: (a) issued a copy of the standard contract for private construction works that was forged to the employees of the said 2nd unit of auction at the Incheon District Court auction office located in Nam-dong, Incheon, Nam-gu, Incheon; and (b) exercised it as if they were duly constituted.

3. Notwithstanding that the Defendant could not exercise the right of retention because the fact at the time, time, and place as mentioned in paragraph (2) was in fact carried out by the owner of the above real estate under a contract from I, who is the owner of the above real estate, and thus, he could not exercise the right of retention, the right declaration based on the right of retention that the lien holder