Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

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

Punishment of the crime

On September 25, 2009, the Defendant issued a promissory note with a face value of KRW 50 million at a discount in the name of the above company and issued a promissory note with a face value of KRW 50 million for the operation of the company from C Director Co., Ltd. and D who is in a position as an adviser of the above company, and around September 2009, around December 25, 2009, one promissory note with face value of KRW 50 million was issued.

D Around March 2010, it was proposed that F, who is in the position of the Director General of the E E E E Editor, would use the said Promissory Notes discounted and used them in installments. F, around May 2010, received and kept the said Promissory Notes from D and then delivered them to G, who is a paper-seller, after hearing the words that F, would make a discount of the said Promissory Notes, and around May 7, 2010, G received 47 million won as the said Promissory Notes from the victim H as the said discount amount and delivered the instant Promissory Notes to H.

However, most of the above discount amount was used by F for the purpose of (State) EF transportation expenses, etc., and the Defendant did not receive the said discount amount.

On August 27, 2010, the Defendant received the said promissory note from the victim under the pretext of extending or re-issuinging the maturity date of the promissory note kept in the victim’s custody under the above circumstances at the “J office” office for the operation of the victim H in Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, Seoul. On August 27, 2010, the Defendant had the effect of tearing the promissory note.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol against Defendant and G (including H substitute part);

1. Each police statement of H and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of a complaint, promissory note copy, tear gas, and investigative report;

1. Relevant Article 366 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 366 of the Selection of Punishment;

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

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Criminal Procedure Act") lies in a depth of the defendant's mistake and fine.