Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

In fact, the Defendant, from February 2010, allowed the Defendant to use the name of “D” company operated by the Defendant to ship C from around February 2, 201, but, at the same time, C did not resolve the amount of KRW 3,600,000 to F Co., Ltd., which occurred when it supplied the system gas product to E in the name of “D”, and did not receive a demand notice from F Co., Ltd. for the repayment of obligations on November 201, the Defendant did not intend to file a false complaint against C with the purport that C had entered into a contract for forgery and supply using the company’s name without permission.

Around December 21, 2011, the defendant prepared a written complaint against G at the office of mutually infinite Certified Judicial Scriveners in Ansan-si, Dong-gu.

A written complaint states that "The defendant-appellant G concludes a contract with E Co., Ltd. for the supply of system watcher products (hereinafter referred to as "the contract of this case") and uses D's seal impression and name plates operated by the complainant at will without permission of the complainant to forge and exercise D's name contracts, and arbitrarily purchase A's name materials in the name of the complainant's company, and punish the credit payment because it does not complete payment."

However, it is true that G concluded the instant contract with E Company in the name of D Company and agreed to purchase aluminium materials from F, even though it is well aware of the fact that G concluded a contract with E Company.

On December 2, 2011, the Defendant submitted and received a written complaint in a false manner, which was prepared by the Defendant, to the president of the Kandong Police Station.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial legal statement of G;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. A criminal complaint prepared by the defendant;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to record recording of telephone communications;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Article 156 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of penalties;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The ground for conviction under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act is the case.