A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a staff member of the Seoul Jung-gu D shopping mall management office who is engaged in the management of the above shopping mall from March 2008 to May 2012.

The defendant, on behalf of E, had the right to dispose of the E commercial buildings owned by E, by means of pretending to acquire the purchase price.

1. On May 2012, the Defendant prepared, without authority, one copy of the real estate sales contract, which is a private document concerning rights and duties, in the column for indicating the real estate in the real estate sales contract real estate transaction contract real estate in order to exercise the right in the first place in the police, without authority, the Defendant entered the name of the Defendant in the column for indicating the real estate transaction contract real estate in the column for indicating the real estate in the first place, “12/128 of the building in Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul, and KRW 30 million, KRW 100 million, KRW 100 million, KRW 100 million in the intermediate payment column, KRW 100 million in the balance column, and KRW 108-105 in the seller’s address column.

2. Around May 7, 2011, the Defendant in a fraudulent and qualified private document uttering refers to a false statement that “The 112th and 128th prices of the D Building have come to the victim I” at the said D commercial management office. The seller must enter into a contract in Canada immediately. The seller is KRW 230 million and the sales amount is KRW 230 million and the intermediate payment is paid KRW 23 million and the intermediate payment is paid KRW 69 million, the balance will be deemed as a substitute for succeeding the bank loans and the deposit to the tenants.” The sales contract prepared with qualification ambiguously.

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have been delegated to trade from E, and even if receiving the purchase price from the victim, there was no intention or ability to transfer the ownership of the said store.

As such, the Defendant deceivings the victim as such, and under the pretext of 23 million won and part payments as contract deposit on May 7, 2011, the Defendant is entitled to 23 million won and part payments.