Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant shall be the chairperson of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Committee for Promotion of D Housing Redevelopment Improvement Projects.

On February 11, 2010, the Defendant issued a loan certificate to the victim F in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan E building, stating that “I would not have any evidence that I would have received money from the company as the Bank Chairperson is the Bank Chairperson. I would like to settle it well by finding out the fact that I would be able to receive KRW 100 million from the company (ju) instead of the loan certificate. I borrowed KRW 20 million from H of the representative director of the G.

However, even if the Defendant borrowed KRW 20 million from H and made the victim prepare a loan certificate on behalf of the victim, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay the money borrowed from H.

As above, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, had the victim prepare a loan certificate and exempted the victim from the liability of KRW 20 million with respect to H, thereby acquiring pecuniary benefits.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F, H and I;

1. A certificate of borrowing money (F, H, and I’s statements are consistent, specific, and consistent with each other in respect of facts charged. Furthermore, the relationship between F, H, and I at the time of appearance and oath of the witness and the attitude, content, F, H, H, and I at the time of making the statement (in particular, I has no economic interest or weak interest in the content of the statement in relation to this case).

In light of the above, it is determined that the facts charged as evidence in the summary of the evidence are proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt for the application of the statute.

1. Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crime;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is different from the background of the instant case, the Defendant’s attitude shown in this court, the amount actually paid to H after the instant criminal facts, and the Defendant’s criminal punishment record once.