beta
Text
Defendants shall be punished by imprisonment for ten months.
However, as to the Defendants for two years from the date of the final judgment of this case, the Defendants are above.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On April 2010, the Defendants: (a) concluded a lease agreement with Defendant B on the first and second lease agreement with Defendant B on the Sungnam-gu E apartment No. 1 and 202 owned by Defendant A’s husband D; (b) entered into a false lease agreement as if Defendant B had resided with the person having chonsegwon; and (c) using the false lease agreement, Defendant B received a loan from the lending company and offered loans by one half.
1. Forgery of private documents and the display of private documents;
A. On April 2010, the Defendants requested H to the G Licensed Real Estate Agent Office located in Sungnam-gu, Sungnam-gu to provide that “The lessee lost the lease contract, ask for the submission of the lease contract to the lessee’s children’s school,” and H to believe this truth, using a computer installed in the location of the apartment lease file format, the Defendants were paid on December 20, 209, with the deposit deposit deposit deposit deposit deposit deposit deposit deposit cash cash cash cash (60,000), the remainder0 million won, and the remainder0 million won to the G Licensed Real Estate Agent Office located in Sungnam-gu, 201, on December 19, 201 (24 months), and the lessor’s name and seal on November 15, 2009, “The Plaintiff’s name and seal on the deposit deposit file format (20,000,000,0000)” was entered into the name and seal on the Plaintiff’s name and seal on the Gyeonggi apartment’s name and address “No. 120, Da-dong.”
Then, around April 15, 2010, Defendant B issued the forged apartment charter contract as if it was duly formed, by borrowing KRW 20 million from the above company, to K in charge of the above company’s employees who knew of the forgery from the company, at around 15, 2010, the third party company of the above company, 705-9 Samung-dong, Gangnam-gu, Seoul.
As a result, the Defendants conspired to exercise their rights and duties in the name of D, which is a private document with no authority.