A defendant shall be punished by a fine of 500,000 won.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On September 1, 2006, the Defendant appeared on the date for specification of property relations in accordance with the decision of the Seoul Southern District Court (No. 2015Kao No. 4676) of the case of application for specification of property (No. 2015Kao) that was filed by the Defendant to the Seoul Southern District Court.

In fact, the Defendant, despite the existence of a monetary claim of KRW 249 million lent to C, submitted a false list of assets by omitting the claim against the above C at the Incheon District Court located in the 17th Doo-ro, Nam-gu, Incheon, Nam-gu, Incheon, 163 (School-based Doo-dong) around September 11, 2015.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes governing list of property, certificate of borrowing, and certificate of contents in the complaint filed by D;

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Article 68(9) of the Civil Execution Act concerning the selection of punishment, and the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The Defendant, guilty of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, asserts to the effect that in the case of C’s claim, the Defendant is not the actual obligee himself/herself but the Defendant’s will and does not have any long contact with the obligor, and that it was not recorded in the property list because it is unclear whether the statute of limitations is excessive, and that it did not intentionally omit in the reported property.

However, in full view of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, the defendant's assertion by the defendant is not acceptable, as it is sufficiently recognized that the defendant omitted the above claim in the property specification procedure and submitted a false list of property.

A. With regard to the circumstances in which the list of property was omitted, the Defendant, in the course of the investigation, omitted the Defendant’s claim against the obligor C, even though the claim itself exceeds KRW 54 billion, a long-term liaison with the obligor C cannot be received, and thus, it was omitted.

On the other hand, when the trial is in progress, 54 billion won.