A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of imprisonment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant was registered as the representative director of the company from July 23, 2003 to May 20, 201, upon D’s request from July 22, 201 to May 20, 201, while serving as D’s E-accounting employee.

On March 15, 2010, the Defendant transferred KRW 200 million to the company’s management account with the company’s operating fund, but did not receive payment, and, on May 2014, the Defendant used the company’s name as the representative director in order to collect the loan to prepare a false bill of exchange corresponding to the loan and collect the loan by using it.

1. On May 19, 2014, the Defendant prepared false securities: (a) at the notary public G office located on the first floor of the F building in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City on March 10, 2010; and (b) around March 10, 2010, the Defendant issued a promissory note, which is KRW 200,000,000, on March 10, 201; and (c) on March 10, 2010; (b) on the issuance date, Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., for the purpose of exercising the right of seizure and/or assignment order against Co., Ltd., Ltd., for the purpose of exercising the right of seizure and assignment order against Co., Ltd., Ltd.; and (c) on the promissory note form, “the face value amount is KRW 20,000,000,000,000,000,000.”

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising the right, the Defendant prepares a false copy of a promissory note in the name of (ju) E.

2. The Defendant, at the time, at the time, at the place mentioned in the preceding paragraph, submitted a promissory note in which the date of issuance was falsely prepared to the notary public G as if it were genuinely prepared, and exercised the securities in the name of E Co., Ltd.

(A) With respect to each of the crimes listed in paragraphs (1) and (2), the prosecutor was prosecuted for the preparation of qualification-based securities and the exercise of qualification-based securities, but the facts charged were selected as above.

3. The Defendant is guilty.