Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years and for six months, respectively.

However, this judgment is delivered against Defendant B.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A from around 2009, from around 2009, leased 10 floors of the Do building in the name of Dong-gu Incheon, and tried to open and operate the F Hospital. Defendant B was trying to help the opening of the hospital.

1. Defendants’ crime of forging private documents and uttering of falsified Investigation Documents [201 Gohap920]

A. The Defendants, who forged private document, discontinued construction work due to the failure of G to receive the payment of the construction cost, which was ordered by the F Hospital’s artificial insemination.

At the same time, E, the title of the building of the above hospital, was included in the joint owner of the above construction contract and demanded the preparation of a construction contract again, and without permission from E, was expressed in the above construction contract without permission.

On November 25, 2009, the Defendants drafted two copies of the “Standard Contract for Construction Works” between H shelters located in Bupyeong-gu Incheon, Incheon, and I, a staff member in charge of G, and attached a seal of E, in which Defendant B, using a black pen on each contract paper, stating “ Address: Incheon Metropolitan City J GunJ” and Defendant B’s prior custody on the name next to that of E on which Defendant B is printed.

As a result, the Defendants forged two copies of the “Standard Contract for Construction Works” in the name of E, a private document on rights and duties for the purpose of uttering in collusion.

B. The Defendants, at the time, and at the place specified in paragraph (1), delivered two copies of the forged “Standard Contract for Construction Work” to G employees I who knew of the forgery as if they were the document duly formed.

2. The crime of fraud by Defendant A [2012 Gohap192]

A. Since the Defendant was subject to a disposition of license suspension for a period of two years due to a violation of the Medical Service Act, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to open a F Hospital in the name of the Defendant and to grant exclusive license to drug suppliers.