All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts (i.e., a mistake of facts regarding the Defendants’ housing; C’s provisional attachment; and when other creditors intend to make a provisional attachment, the third party would not make a provisional attachment or request for auction, and the F would set up in the future the right to collateral security for which no secured claim exists; and F would file a complaint against F by filing a request for auction based on the right to collateral security without any credit, and thus, it is not reasonable to file a false complaint.

B. Defendant B did not consent or permit the Defendant A to prepare a loan certificate of KRW 200 million on September 20, 2007 in his/her name, and Defendant A, at the F’s request, prepared a loan certificate in the name of the Defendants, as Defendant B’s seal imprint was held and F, and thus, did not file a false complaint.

【Defendant A did not have testified about false facts, and there was no intention of perjury.

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing (Defendant A: one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence, four months of suspended sentence, two years of suspended sentence, and eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The lower court’s judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts: (i) because Defendant B had been living in money with Defendant B without any clear occupation, F made a monetary transaction from time to time with Defendant A; (ii) around April 2005, Defendant A borrowed 145 million won from F with the purchase fund of the instant real estate, and made F with the loan certificate of KRW 100 million (i.e., April 27, 2005) and 45 million with the loan certificate (i.e., October 26, 2005). On April 28, 2005, Defendant B and A’s share (i.e., 1/2) completed the registration of creation of a mortgage over the instant real estate (i.e., the maximum debt amount of KRW 1100 million with the maximum debt amount of KRW 45 million with the purchase fund of the instant real estate, and (ii) Defendant A appears excluded from the compulsory auction procedure of this case.