Defendant 1 and 9

New Eastern State

Law Firm Epis et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Defendant 1 and 2 shall be punished by imprisonment for 2 years, by imprisonment for 3 years, by imprisonment for 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8, by imprisonment for 4 months, by imprisonment for 9 months, by imprisonment for 10,00,00 won, respectively.

With respect to 31 days of detention before the issuance of this judgment, as to Defendant 1, 32 days of detention, and as to Defendant 3, one day of detention shall be included in the above punishment.

However, from the date this judgment became final and conclusive, the execution of each of the above punishment shall be suspended for three years against Defendant 1 and 2, for two years against Defendant 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8.

Defendant 9 and Defendant 10 are ordered to pay an amount equivalent to the above fine on the stock company.

As the representative director of Defendant 1 corporation, Defendant 1 is the so-called planning real estate business operator who purchased at a low price the land which is likely to be developed into the site of electric power resource, and added to the speculative deliberation of the general public due to the increase in land prices, and raises the proceeds by selling them at a high price.

Defendant 2 is a so-called real estate development specialist who operates a real estate brokerage office to increase land price to the maximum extent through the process of development, such as cadastral division and flat work, so that land purchased by a planning real estate business operator can be constructed.

As the representative director of Defendant 10 Stock Company, Defendant 3 is a construction business operator who makes the forests and land balanced by using heavy equipment, etc.

Defendant 4 is a licensed real estate agent who operated an office with the trade name of ○○ Licensed Real Estate Agent Office in the Female-gun of Gyeonggi-gun (hereinafter detailed address 7 omitted).

Defendant 5 is a person who runs the real estate brokerage business without permission at the above ○○ Licensed Real Estate Agent Office.

Defendant 6 is a person who runs the real estate brokerage business without permission at the office of △ Licensed Real Estate Agent.

Defendant 7 is a licensed real estate agent who operates his office in the name of "Seong Licensed Real Estate Agent Office" in the Female-gun Eup in Gyeonggi-gun (hereinafter referred to as "Seong-gun 8 omitted).

Defendant 8 is a cadastral technician belonging to the branch office of the Korea Cadastral Corporation and is in charge of cadastral surveying business with a cadastral technician's license.

Defendant 9 Co., Ltd is a corporation mainly established for real estate rental business.

Defendant 10 Co., Ltd is a corporation mainly established for reinforced concrete construction.

1. Joint crimes committed by Defendants 1 and 2 (False Entry in the Original Copy of Notarial Deed and Exercise of the Original Copy of Notarial Deed);

A. On March 6, 2007, the Defendants purchased 64,463 square meters in the name of the Defendant Company in the name of the Co., Ltd., and developed it as a site for electric power supply, and sold it at a price much higher than that of the former at a higher price. On March 6, 2007, the Defendants 64,463 square meters in the female-gun, Sin-gun (hereinafter referred to as the “detailed address 2 omitted) 1 omitted (hereinafter referred to as the “instant forest”).

First of all, in order to divide the forest land of this case into several lots in order to obtain public confidence from the persons to be sold in lots in a short period, the cadastral partition procedure in accordance with the provisions of the law is close, and in particular, when the planning real estate company directly files an application for partition of the land in a large unit with the Gun office, it is known that the court can obtain the permission of partition from the Gun office if the application for partition of the land can be easily obtained from the Gun office, on the basis of the decision of adjustment that "if several persons purchase the forest land of this case in a different way while the planning real estate company is aware that permission is not obtained in accordance with the prohibition provision in accordance with the Cadastral Act."

Accordingly, the Defendants made a false sales contract with the Suwon District Court on March 20, 2007 after lending the name from 10 persons, including Nonindicted 1, etc. to each share, and made a false sales contract with the Suwon District Court on March 20, 2007, and the fact that 10 persons, etc., including Nonindicted 1, etc., purchased the forest land of this case from Defendant 9 on May 15, 2007, although there was no actual purchase of the forest land of this case by 10 persons, etc., including Nonindicted 1, etc., in spite of the fact that they actually purchased the forest land of this case, the Defendants made a request for the transfer registration of ownership and a false real estate sales contract for the said false content to the public official in charge of receipt who may know of the fact that they were to request the division of the forest of this case, and made the above court Nonindicted 2 judge to prepare the procedure for the transfer registration of ownership in each parcel of land of this case on the grounds of a sales contract from May 15, 2007.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to enter false facts in the mediation protocol, which is the original copy of the notarial deed, and submitted the above mediation protocol to the public officials in charge of the above Gun administration who are not aware of the circumstances at the Innju-gun's Eup in the game around May 22, 2008.

B. On August 2007, the Defendants purchased forest land of 30,129 square meters in the name of the Non-Indicted 3 Co., Ltd. (hereinafter the detailed address 3 omitted), and developed it as a site for electric power supply, and sold it at a price higher than that higher than that higher than that higher than that.

Accordingly, the Defendants made a false sales contract for each share by lending the name from Nonindicted 4, etc. 3 in the above way, and prepared a false sales contract for each share, and around August 2007, the fact that three persons, including Nonindicted 4, etc., purchased the above forest from Nonindicted Co. 3 on August 10, 2007, notwithstanding the fact that three persons, such as the purchaser, Nonindicted 4, etc., purchase the forest from Nonindicted Co. 3 on August 10, 2007, submitted an application for the registration of ownership transfer to the receiving public official who is unaware of the fact that “if the purchase of the forest was made from Nonindicted Co. 3, etc. on August 10, 2007, the request for the division of the above forest,” and submitted to the above court Nonindicted 5, on September 14, 2007, to the receiving public official who is aware of the fact that “the ownership transfer registration procedure for each purchaser is implemented by dividing the forest in lots 662-3 through 662-62-6159.”

As a result, the Defendants conspired to enter false facts in the mediation protocol, which is the original copy of the authentic deed, and around that time, the Inn-gun Office located in the Inn-gun Eup in the Gyeonggi-gun, submitted the above mediation protocol to the public official in charge of the above Gun office who is not aware of the fact.

C. On December 2007, the Defendants purchased a forest land of 11,075 square meters in the name of Nonindicted Co. 3’s name, and developed it as a site for electric power supply, and sold it at a price higher than that higher than that higher than that higher than that.

Accordingly, the Defendants made a false sales contract from two persons, such as Nonindicted 6, etc., for each share, and prepared a false sales contract for each share, and around December 2007, the fact was that two persons, such as Nonindicted 6, etc., purchased the above forest from Nonindicted Co. 3 on December 3, 2007, notwithstanding the fact that they actually purchased the said forest, the Defendants made a written application for the registration of ownership transfer with the purport that “if two persons, such as the purchaser, Nonindicted 6, etc. purchased the forest from Nonindicted Co. 3, the purchase of the said forest from the purchaser, so the purchase of the forest from Nonindicted Co. 3 is changed in division,” and submitted a written application for the registration of ownership transfer with the purport that “the real estate sales contract for the said false content is changed to the receiving public official who is unaware of the fact that it is, around February 1, 2008, to Nonindicted 5, the above court prepared a written protocol for the registration of ownership transfer to each purchaser by dividing the forest into four parcels.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to enter false facts in the mediation protocol, which is the original copy of the authentic deed, and around that time, the Inn-gun Office located in the Inn-gun Eup in the Gyeonggi-gun, submitted the above mediation protocol to the public official in charge of the above Gun office who is not aware of the fact.

2. Joint offenses by Defendants 1, 2, and 3 (Violation of Mountainous Districts Management Act);

A. Meanwhile, the Defendants gathered to cut standing timber to facilitate sale by presenting to the buyers the fact that part of the instant forest land was created as a building site, which is 29,000 square meters of the instant forest land.

Accordingly, on May 1, 2007, the Defendants applied for permission to cut standing trees of 8,000 won for the purpose of planting and improving the species of trees to female-gun around May 1, 2007 and obtained permission to cut standing trees from female-gun around May 4, 2007.

피고인들은 위 조정조서와 입목벌채허가서 등을 토대로 성명불상의 텔레마케터 및 고용 공소외 7로 하여금 주변의 지인 및 불특정 사람들에게 전화를 걸게 하여 "주택을 건축할 수 있는 임야를 평탄작업한 후 분양한다. 부지조성을 위하여 겉으로는 주말농장이지만 주택을 건축할 수 있어 토지가격이 상승할 것이다. 특히 이 지역은 영동고속도로와 첼시 아울렛 매장이 인접해 있고, 앞으로 수도권전철이 들어올 계획으로 아주 전망이 좋은 곳으로서 투자가치도 있으니 분양을 받도록 하라"는 내용의 광고를 하면서 투자를 적극 유도하였고, 이에 현혹된 투자자들에게 매입가격의 3~4배, 많게는 5~6배 이상 되는 가격에 분양하였으며, 2007. 12. 하순경까지 이 사건 1임야를 90억원에 분양하여 약 60억원 상당이 차익금을 취하였다.

The Defendants, as they were insufficient to cut standing timber in the course of sale, intended to make the instant forest land smooth by showing clearly the fact that the instant forest land is created in the construction site to the persons to be sold in lots.

However, in obtaining permission for the reclamation of the forest land of this case into dry field, the area of not less than 30,000§³ is not only an environmental review but also a cultural heritage surface survey. The period for ownership in the survey is about one year, and the development permission is not contrary to the above cultural heritage surface survey on the ground that it does not fit the business characteristics of the planned real estate that should be on board for a short period of less than one year, and the development permission is already granted for some 29,800§³ of the forest land of this case including the land for which felling work has already been completed (hereinafter “the forest land of this case”).

On November 20, 2007, the Defendants filed an application for permission for reclamation with the aim of converting the instant forest land of 29,800 square meters into chills or ornamental water for planting chills or ornamental water. On December 17, 2007, the Defendants obtained permission for reclamation from female-gun on and around December 17, 2007, and diverted mountainous districts from around that time by performing flat work.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to convert mountainous districts by obtaining permission for conversion by false or other unlawful means.

B. On February 14, 2008, Defendant 1 and 2 filed an application for secondary reclamation with respect to 21,600 square meters of the instant forest land (hereinafter “the instant forest land”) among the instant forest land, on which no usual coal work was conducted, when the buyers either bought or bought part of the instant forest land failed to perform the land development work according to the promise. However, Defendant 1 and 2 filed a civil petition with neighboring residents at the place where the instant forest land was engaged in usual work with the first permission, and filed a civil petition with neighboring residents for a lot of time due to the environmental review of the site for the second permission (the instant forest land 3). Unlike the plan, when it was impossible to obtain the land development permission from the Gun office by April 2008, Defendant 1 and 2 notified Defendant 3 of the aforementioned circumstances, which led to the cancellation of the sale contract and the cancellation of some of the sale contract and the occurrence of monetary loss, etc., and notified Defendant 3 of the aforementioned order to do so.

Accordingly, Defendant 3 knew of the fact that he did not obtain permission for reclamation, and used a 20,968 square meters of forests and rocks planted in the relevant place from May 2, 2008 to October 10 of the same month, Defendant 3 converted the use of forest land to a mountainous district by removing standing trees and rocks, etc. planted in the relevant place, using a refacing season, etc., which is a part of the instant 3 forest land, from around May 2, 2008 to 208.

In this case, the permission for conversion of mountainous district should be obtained from the administrative agency in advance. Nevertheless, the defendants conspired to convert mountainous district without obtaining permission for conversion of mountainous district.

3. A. Defendant 9 Company

Defendant 1, the representative director, obtained permission for conversion of mountainous district by fraudulent or other illegal means in relation to Defendant’s business, and converted mountainous district without obtaining permission for conversion of mountainous district.

B. Defendant 10

Defendant 3, the representative director, obtained permission for conversion of a mountainous district by fraudulent or other illegal means in relation to Defendant’s business, and converted the mountainous district without obtaining permission for conversion of a mountainous district.

4. Joint criminal conduct by Defendants 2 and 5 (Violation of the Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act).

No person may take over or borrow another person’s certificate of licensed real estate agent. Nevertheless, from May 2006 to July 2008, the Defendants obtained the real estate agent’s license under the name of Defendant 4, a licensed real estate agent, on condition that the above ○○ Licensed Real Estate Agent’s Office provides four million won per year.

As a result, the Defendants conspired to lend another person’s certificate of qualification to the Defendants.

5. Defendant 2 (Violation of Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act)

The Defendant is registered as a brokerage assistant to the above ○○ Licensed Real Estate Agent Office. Around March 6, 2007, the Defendant, the representative of the ○○○○ Family Association, and Nonindicted 8 and Defendant Co., Ltd., the representative of the ○○○○○○ Association, have arranged a sales contract for selling and selling 64,463 square meters of the instant forest land on 3 billion won, and received KRW 232 million from Defendant 1. However, the broker, etc. may not receive money and valuables under any pretext exceeding the fees or actual expenses prescribed by the Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act.

Nevertheless, the Defendant received 230 million won, which is an amount exceeding 27 million won, which is a statutory fee due to real estate brokerage.

6. Defendant 4 (Violation of Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act)

(a) No licensed real estate agent shall allow any other person to conduct the brokerage business using his name, nor transfer or lend his certificate of licensed real estate agent to any other person;

Nevertheless, from May 2006 to July 2008, the Defendant lent its qualification certificate to Defendant 2 and Defendant 5 at the above ○○ Licensed Real Estate Agent Office.

B. Defendant 2, who is a brokerage assistant, committed the Defendant’s act in violation of Article 230,000 won exceeding 27,000,000,000 won, which is a statutory commission for real estate brokerage in connection with the Defendant’s business.

7. Defendant 6 (Violation of Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act)

Any person who intends to run a real estate brokerage business shall register the establishment of the head of the competent Si/Gun, and shall not engage in the brokerage business using the name or trade name of another person, and shall not acquire the qualification certificate of a licensed real estate agent from another person or use it upon lease.

On March 6, 2007, the Defendant: (a) obtained a licensed real estate agent’s license from Defendant 7 to August 2008; (b) mediated the real estate sales contract for the instant forest land between Nonindicted 8, the representative of the ○○○○ Family Association and Defendant Company 9 in the name of Defendant 7 and 4; and (c) received a brokerage fee of KRW 130 million from November 2005 to August 2008; and (d) provided brokerage services with a licensed real estate agent’s license lent from Defendant 7 to August 2008.

In this respect, the defendant carried out a brokerage business without registering the establishment of a brokerage office, carried out a brokerage business using another person's name, and borrowed a certificate of qualification of a licensed real estate agent to another person.

8. Defendant 7

Around March 6, 2007, the Defendant lent a real estate agent license of the Defendant to Defendant 6 from November 2005 to August 2008, 2008, including that Nonindicted 8 related to the instant forest land that the Defendant did not act as a broker to Defendant 6 and that the real estate sales contract between Defendant 9 and Defendant 6 was made using the Defendant’s qualification and name. In return, the Defendant borrowed a real estate agent license of the Defendant from November 2005 to August 2008.

Accordingly, the defendant lent his licensed real estate agent qualification certificate to another person, and let another person conduct brokerage business using his name.

9. Defendant 8

Any employee of the Korea Cadastral Survey Corporation shall be prohibited from receiving any price for his/her cadastral surveyor under any pretext except cadastral survey fees prescribed in the Cadastral Act.

Nevertheless, around December 206, the Defendant received KRW 54,622,800 in total on six occasions, as shown in the attached list of crimes, from around December 26, 2007, from Nonindicted 9 Co. 10, in consideration of the fact that Nonindicted Co. 10 requested the division of land on four parcels, including the fact that he received KRW 2,40,000 from Nonindicted 10 on December 11, 2006, in return for the commission of the division of land on his behalf.

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Protocol concerning the interrogation of the Defendants by the prosecution

1. Each prosecutor’s statement on Nonindicted 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, and 19

1. The statements of Nonindicted 20, 11, 12, 17, 16, and 21

1. Investigation report (attached to data in a written application for the registration of ownership transfer);

1. A report on investigation (attaching an application for land subdivision);

1. Investigation report (Attachment to a certified real estate register);

1. Investigation report (Attachment of records of registration of transfer of ownership);

1. An investigation report (attaching an application for land division adjustment);

1. An investigation report (Attachment to a certified transcript of the corporate register);

1. Inquiries replys to the registration of establishment of licensed real estate agents;

1. A investigation report (Hearing statements of persons related to the cadastral Corporation and the military cadastral);

1. Investigation report (Attachment of the certified transcript of register of a stock company);

1. Investigation reports (Attachment of documents related to permission for felling standing timber);

1. An investigation report (a detailed address of a female-gun/Eup (hereinafter referred to as "detailed address 3 omitted), a protocol of partition adjustment, etc.;

1. Investigation report (a copy, etc. of a statement of deposit and withdrawal in the bank account in the name of Nonindicted 22);

1. Each protocol of seizure;

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Defendant 1: Articles 228(1) and 229 of the Criminal Act; Articles 53 subparag. 1 and 14(1) of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act

Defendant 2: Articles 228(1) and 229 of the Criminal Act; Articles 53 subparag. 1 and 14(1) of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act; Articles 49(1)1 and 10, 7 and 33 subparag. 3 of the Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act; Article 30 of the Criminal Act

Defendant 3: Article 53 subparag. 1, Article 14(1) of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act

Defendant 4: Articles 49(1)1 and 10, 7, and 33 subparag. 3 of the Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act

Defendant 5: Article 49(1)1 and Article 7 of the Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act, Article 30 of the Criminal Act

Defendant 6: Subparagraph 1 of Article 48 of the Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act, Articles 9, 49(1)1, and 7 of the Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents Act

Defendant 7: Article 49(1)1 and Article 7 of the Business Affairs of Licensed Real Estate Agents and Report of Real Estate Transactions Act

Defendant 8: Articles 52 and 45-2(3) of the Cadastral Act

Defendant 9: Article 53 subparag. 1, Articles 14(1), and 56 of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act

Defendant 10 Corporation: Article 53 subparag. 1, Articles 14(1), and 56 of the Management of Mountainous Districts Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, and 6: former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Inclusion of days of detention in detention;

Defendant 1, 2, and 3: Article 57 of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Defendant 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Order of provisional payment;

Defendant 9 and Defendant 10 Corporation: Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

【Crime Disturbing Table】

Judges Kim Jong-chul