A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Around January 12, 2008, the Defendant: (a) was a person operating C; (b) received a contract from D for construction of a commercial building in Gyeonggi E and F, Gyeonggi-si; (c) paid the construction cost of KRW 50 million; (d) subcontracted the construction cost of KRW 1 billion to G, etc.; (e) paid the said KRW 600 million with the subcontract price; (c) the Defendant’s claim for the outstanding amount of the construction works was not KRW 1.884 billion; (d) however, the Defendant’s claim for the outstanding amount of the construction works did not amount to KRW 1.884 billion; and (e) neglected other bidders from participating in the auction of the building at issue without permission; and (e) attempted to have the winning price reduced and apply for false lien.

On March 5, 2009, the Defendant filed a false lien as if C had a lien of KRW 1.884 billion on the said commercial building owned by D with civil execution of the Suwon District Court and the above court H, etc. on the said commercial building owned by D, and on September 30, 2010, the Defendant reported a false lien as if the Defendant had a lien of KRW 330 million on the said auction case of the said court.

The Defendant, as above, submitted a report on the exercise of the right of retention made false as above to an employee of the illegal source, thereby impairing the fairness of the above real estate auction case by fraudulent means.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused;

1. Detailed statement of lien execution;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to report on investigation (a copy of auction record);

1. Article 315 of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor concerning the crime;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the defendant is the contractor of the above building and the de facto owner has completed a significant portion of the above building construction and thus has considerable amount of claims for construction, there is no particular criminal power, and the criminal facts of the defendant are recognized.