Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the defendant B is above two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

C was sentenced to three years of imprisonment for embezzlement at the Gwangju District Court on September 22, 2011, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on March 12, 2015.

Defendant

A is the owner of the registered injury of the land located in the Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju and its ground house (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and Defendant B was a congested with Defendant A.

Defendant

On May 31, 2012, at the request of G, a creditor of A, a decision of compulsory auction (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) was made with respect to the instant real estate to the Gwangju District Court H.

Accordingly, Defendants A, B, and C conspired to the effect that “I do not actually bear their respective obligations against Defendants B and C, as if they were liable for the debt, I prepared a false non-performance of compulsory enforcement, and then, based on this, made a request for distribution in the auction procedure of the instant case.”

1. Crimes committed by Defendant A and B;

A. On August 10, 2012, according to the aforementioned public offering, the Defendants stated the false description of the original copy of the process deed, the exercise of the original copy of the process deed, and the evasion of compulsory execution, as if they were the notary public’s J office located in Seo-gu Daejeon, Daejeon, that was, Defendant A did not bear the obligation against Defendant B, the Defendants stated the false fact as if they were the notary public bears the obligation of KRW 175 million.

A notary public who was aware of such fact shall borrow KRW 175 million from Defendant B on November 12, 2007, and shall complete payment until August 17, 2012.

Defendant

If A has failed to perform his obligation, it shall be recognized that there is no objection immediately through compulsory execution.

“ ........”

As such, the Defendants conspired to enter false facts in the original copy of the fairness deed of monetary consumption lending and lending contract (No. 8787, 2012, hereinafter “the instant fairness deed”), and exercised it immediately, and Defendant 1 was exempt from compulsory execution by the victim G with the aim of avoiding compulsory execution.