beta
Text
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months and by imprisonment for eight months.
, however, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
Defendant
A around March 3, 2011, offered Dongjak-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Carryover 201 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) as security, and borrowed KRW 245,00,000 from E Agricultural Cooperative under D’s name, but it was impossible to pay the loan interest at the time due to aggravation of economic conditions from September 2012.
Accordingly, the Defendants, compared to the progress of the auction procedure on the instant real estate, had Defendant B et al. pretended as a small lessee and had them apply for a demand for distribution. Defendant A delivered his seal imprint certificate to Defendant B, and Defendant B conspired to take charge of the role of preparing a false lease contract and submitting it to the court.
1. On September 2012, the Defendants jointly committed a false real estate lease agreement with Defendant A, who had not paid money to Defendant B as a security deposit, even though they had not paid money to Defendant A as a security deposit, on September 13, 2012, Defendant B paid a security deposit of KRW 25 million in the form of the lease agreement, and prepared a false real estate lease agreement with Defendant A as if he leased the instant real estate.
After February 15, 2013, when the Seoul Central District Court rendered a decision to voluntarily commence the auction of the instant real estate on February 15, 2013, Defendant B filed an application with the Seoul Central District Court civil petition office located in Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Central District Court for a report on the right to the said auction goods and a request for distribution of the said auction goods through the said contract.
As a result, the Defendants conspired to commit a fraudulent act to the fairness of the auction of the instant real estate.
2. On September 2012, Defendant B prepared a false lease agreement as stated in paragraph (1) with a policeman, and the fact that Defendant B did not have paid the lease deposit to Defendant’s father G and his husband H with respect to the instant real estate. However, GD using the pentle in the lease agreement.