사기등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
Of the facts charged in the instant case, a letter of guarantee for construction contract.
In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant’s joint and several liability for damages incurred by the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s joint and several liability for damages incurred by the Plaintiff and the Defendant’s joint and several liability for damages incurred by the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s joint and several liability for damages incurred by the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s joint and several liability for damages incurred by the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s joint and several liability for damages incurred by the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s joint and several liability for damages incurred by the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s joint and several liability for damages incurred by the Plaintiff.
B Using the seal of the farming association, I tried to prepare a contract for work as if the B farming association guarantees the construction cost claimed by F.
On September 2, 2009, the Defendant: (a) under the title of “E Creation Contract” and “in the column of the modified contract amount” using a computer without obtaining consent from D, the representative of B farming cooperatives, at a non-permanent location on September 2, 2009; (b) the Defendant: (c) KRW 20,000,000; (d) KRW 211,200,000 in the column of the previous contract amount; (e) KRW 210,000 in the amount of the modified contract; (e) KRW 30,000 in the amount of the previous contract; (e) KRW 11,20,000 in the column of the contractor; (e) KRW 3(C); (g) “In the column of the contractor’s name”; (e) “FH in the contractor’s name; (e) the number of the corporate directors; (e) the representative director; and (e) the name of D in the name of Chungcheongnam-gun;
B The stamp of the farming association was affixed.
Accordingly, the Defendant forged one copy of “A letter of guarantee for construction contract” in the name of the farming association B, a private document on rights and obligations.
2) The Defendant presented one copy of the construction contract entered into in the name of the farming cooperative under the name of B, which was forged at the above time and in an unspecified place, to an employee who could not know the forgery.
B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the admitted evidence.
(c)
However, the judgment below is the judgment below.