1. Defendant A shall be punished by a fine of three million won, and Defendant B shall be punished by a fine of one million won.

2. Defendants each of the above facts.

Punishment of the crime

On May 15, 2015, the Defendants conspired to prepare a certificate of loan that “A borrowed KRW 120 million from B on December 3, 2008 on the condition that A shall pay interest at the rate of 1.2 million per annum.” On the same day, the E-office of notary public located in Seo-gu Daejeon on the same day, which was notarized by the creditor F of Defendant A applied for an auction on the site, etc. located in the Daejeon-gu Daejeon District Court, Daejeon District Court for compulsory auction of real estate owned by Defendant A in the name of the Defendant.

However, Defendant A did not borrow KRW 120,000 from Defendant B on December 3, 2008, but the Defendants conspired to assume the aforementioned false debt and filed an application for dividend in the name of B, thereby damaging the said obligee.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ legal statement

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. A notarized deed, search for an auction case (H), investigation report (verification of requested amount), (including a report on rights in the name of Defendant B, on the evidence record No. 236, and an application for demand for distribution);

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Relevant Articles 327 and 30 of the Criminal Act and the Defendants’ choice of punishment regarding criminal facts: Articles 327 and 30 of the Criminal Act; Selection of fines

1. Defendants of detention in a workhouse: Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act

1. Defendants of the provisional payment order: The crime of this case with the reason for sentencing under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, where Defendant A bears a large amount of debt, was conducted in collusion with Defendant B for the purpose of reducing the creditors’ dividend amount, making a false claim in the name of Defendant B for the purpose of reducing the creditors’ dividend amount. The Defendants’ crime and liability are not less weak in light of the background and motive of the crime of this case, and the amount of debt falsely borne.

In addition, Defendant A had 12 criminal records, including once a sentence is sentenced and twice a suspended sentence, by making it unclear the location of Defendant A and avoiding investigation procedures.

On the other hand, Defendant B received the request of Defendant A.