사기등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. In full view of the consistent statement of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) and the prosecutor’s statement corresponding thereto, each letter sent and received by H and M, and the defendant’s interview details with H as to H in addition to the defendant’s and M, etc., H did not delegate his/her authority to the defendant to M to transfer all of the construction cost claim and lien of G Co., Ltd. and the fact that the defendant committed the instant crime by being well aware of such circumstances.
Nevertheless, the court below rendered a not guilty verdict of the facts charged in this case on the grounds of a partial statement of M short of credibility. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination
A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as to the forgery of private documents and the uttering of the above investigation documents, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is a violation of law by mistake of facts as alleged in the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor.
subsection (b) of this section.
Therefore, this part of the prosecutor's argument is without merit.
① At the time H was detained on March 2013, M was in office as an auditor of G Co., Ltd.
After H’s detention, M performed the overall business of the lien (hereinafter “the instant lien”) held at the construction site of the F Hospital by G, Inc., according to H’s direction, and discussed H and construction site possession, attendance of litigation for confirmation of non-existence of a lien, and appointment of an agent. H granted the Defendant the authority to delegate “all the right of possession of the lien” to the Defendant and to affix the corporate seal.
(2) The defendant.