The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As a genuine tenant, C, a stock company, the representative director of which is the defendant, was the defendant, to be the representative director, paid the lease deposit amount of KRW 50 million. However, since the data was not found, there was an error between the defendant and the defendant in the crime of alteration, there was the intent to acquire the defendant in filing a lawsuit for the return of deposit.

However, the court below found the defendant guilty on the crime of attempted fraud. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The punishment of the lower court (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The court below erred in the facts. ① the defendant is the owner of the office of this case, ② the defendant applied for the payment order of KRW 50 million to the victim with the altered document attached, even though he was aware that he did not remit the amount of KRW 50 million to the defendant on March 18, 2004. ③ The defendant alleged that the above alteration was made in the appellate trial of related civil procedure, not around 2004, but around 50 million, and submitted as evidence the statement of remittance as evidence of November 9, 2001, but the appellate court did not accept the defendant's assertion that the above money was the lease deposit for the office of this case (Seoul District Court Decision 2014Na971 delivered to the defendant on November 19, 2001). ④ The defendant again submitted the revised statement of KRW 50,000 to the defendant on March 20, 208, and submitted the new statement of the deposit and the new statement of KRW 200,000 as evidence.