Defendant

A shall be punished by a fine for negligence of KRW 1,200,00, and by a fine of KRW 700,000.

The above fine is imposed against the Defendants.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

B was conducted by exercising the right to collateral security on the land owned by the Defendant B and the auction was conducted, and the method was sought from the Defendant A to prevent the said land from being disposed of by auction.

Defendant

A, on January 31, 2013, 2013, after pointing out the stamped part of the confirmation document on D, which was stamped in the letter of confirmation on D in the name of the attorney-at-law, attached it to the transparent tape, attached the G’s unmanned part, which was stamped in the letter of confirmation on F, and then copied and altered the said confirmation document. On March 31, 2013, the Defendants conspired to submit a written request for cancellation of the registration of creation of a mortgage and the suspension of compulsory execution against D and then withdrawn the said altered document on March 11, 2013.

On September 30, 2014, Defendants were indicted to the Seoul Eastern District Court as the facts charged, and the trial was conducted on the case of attempted fraud, etc. by the said court.

According to the above judgment, the crime of attempted fraud was committed on April 9, 2015; Defendant A was sentenced to a suspended sentence of three years for one year and six months; Defendant B was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for ten months; and the above judgment was finalized on April 17, 2015.

1. A around January 22, 2015, the Defendant appeared at the Seoul Eastern District Court No. 9, the Seoul Eastern District Court, located in the 404 Gasan-ro, Seoul, Seoul, as a witness, and took an oath against B, such as attempted fraud.

The prosecutor presented to the defendant a written confirmation of the 49th page of the evidence record of the above case, and asked the defendant questions as follows: “The confirmation document was issued in the old registry office as B/C, regardless of whether the person made an appraisal, 49 pages,” and “the statement of confirmation was presented in the old registry office as B/C,” and the defendant testified as “e.g.,”

The prosecutor's "the original confirmation document of the witness" erases and copies the B unmanned which was in the original confirmation document to the defendant, and then makes it impossible for the prosecutor to do so.