Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who has been awarded a subcontract for a new construction of a tenement house from the comprehensive construction of a private person (ju) in the construction of a construction of a new apartment house in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu and four lots (hereinafter referred to as “the instant loan”).

When the Defendant was unable to receive the payment of the construction cost from the owners of the proposed comprehensive construction and the instant loan, the Defendant made a demand for distribution on the ground of the claim for construction cost of KRW 1150 million on the ground of the claim for construction cost in the instant loan and the instant auction on the real estate subject to auction, and made a report on the lien on January 29, 2013.

On March 29, 2013, the Defendant recommended the victim D, etc. to participate in the bid of the instant loan, and prepared and entered a written waiver of the right of retention to waive the entire right of retention for the instant loan to the victim D, etc. around March 29, 2013, and D, etc. was awarded a successful bid on April 29, 2013.

When the Defendant received only KRW 417,751,295, unlike the Defendant’s idea in the above auction procedure, the Defendant had already prepared a letter of waiver of the right of retention and renounced the right of retention, and had been willing to file a lawsuit to confirm the existence of the right of retention by asserting that the Defendant did not occupy the loan of this case but did not possess it at the time of filing the lawsuit.

On February 5, 2015, the Defendant filed a lawsuit to confirm the existence of a lien with the term “as to the instant loan Nos. 301, 302, and 403, the Plaintiff confirms the existence of a lien,” with the Suwon Flag method, and the Defendant filed a lawsuit to confirm the existence of a lien with the Plaintiff.

2. On 23. 23. The plaintiff submitted to the same court the purport of the claim that "as to subparagraph 301, 302, and 403 of the loan of this case, the plaintiff shall confirm the existence of a lien with an amount equivalent to 20% per annum from the next day of the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case to the day of complete payment, with respect to the above amount of KRW 529,248,795, and the above amount."

In the end, the defendant deceivings the court, and thereby, 529,248.