공정증서원본불실기재등
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. On March 15, 201, the Defendant: (a) concluded a contract with D on December 15, 2010 to transfer all the outstanding shares of E Co., Ltd.; (b) business rights; (c) assets in the place of business; and (d) transferred all the assets, such as machinery, appliances, etc. in the said casino business place and the place of business to D; (c) on January 15, 201, the Defendant filed a false report on the loss of corporate identification to a registered official without knowledge of the fact; (d) reported the corporate identification at will by reporting the corporate identification to the head of the said corporation; and (e) had the said public official register the said seal impression in the corporate identification book; and (e) exercised the said corporate identification book by having D keep the said corporate identification book recorded in the said Jeju District Court as above.
2. Determination and conclusion that a notarial deed referred to in Article 228(1) of the Criminal Act refers only to a notarial deed as to rights and obligations, and the notarial deed is not a notarial deed under Article 228(1) of the Criminal Act, which is an official book in which an administrative agency has obtained the registration of the applicant’s seal imprint in order to promote the convenience of the public by proving the applicant’s seal imprint currently
(See Supreme Court Decision 68Do1231, Nov. 19, 1968). Accordingly, each of the facts charged in this case constitutes a case that does not constitute a crime and thus, the defendant is acquitted pursuant to the former part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act.