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

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

On December 2014, the defendant prepared a false complaint against D, E, and F with the aim of having D, E, and F criminal punishment imposed at a certified judicial scrivener office located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Seocho-gu.

A written complaint contains the following facts: “Around April 1, 2008, the Defendant’s Nonparty provided land as collateral and borrowed KRW 14 million in the name of F in the name of the complainant with the loan of KRW 14 million in the name of the Defendant’s own possession of the complainant,” forged a promissory note in the name of the complainant around November 19, 2008. A promissory note in the name of a face value of KRW 445 million in face value. Around November 27, 2008, with respect to H and 12 parcels owned by the complainant, the obligee forged and forged a written claim for collateral security in the name of the complainant which created the right to collateral security and created the right to collateral security without permission, and thus, the Defendant did not permit the use of the document, i.e., the document to establish the right to collateral security, the loan transaction, and a promissory note directly.”

Nevertheless, on December 9, 2014, the defendant submitted a false complaint to the public service center of the Daejeon District public prosecutor's office located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Daejeon, Seo-gu, Daejeon, to the employee in charge and filed a false complaint with D, E, and F.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each legal statement of a witness I, J and K;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol against D, E, or F;

1. Statement of the police concerning L;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Article 156 of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

2. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Competition.

3. Selection of an alternative fine;

4. The reason for sentencing under Articles 70(1) and 69(2) of the Criminal Act is a crime committed during the period of repeated crime; however, there is no room to take the lead of the filing of a complaint by the inspector, who is an employee of the inspection team.