[부동산소유권이전등기등에관한특별조치법위반][공1987.12.15.(814),1835]
Whether Article 13 (1) of the Act on Special Measures for the Transfer, etc. of Real Estate has been violated where the registration completed in accordance with the Act on Special Measures for the Transfer, etc. of Real Estate
Even if the registration of transfer of ownership on the registry is valid because it complies with the substantive relationship, if it has made a false certification or exercised the document after obtaining a written confirmation, it shall constitute a crime against the Act on Special Measures for the Registration,
Article 13 (1) of the Act on Special Measures for Transfer of Ownership of Real Estate
Supreme Court Decision 82Do3137 delivered on August 23, 1983, 84Do1750 delivered on March 12, 1985, Supreme Court Decision 86Do2520 delivered on January 20, 1987
Defendant
Defendant
Attorney Or-il
Daegu High Court Decision 86No1623 delivered on July 16, 1987
The appeal is dismissed.
We examine the grounds of appeal.
According to the evidence of the judgment of the court below and the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court below, it is sufficient to recognize the criminal facts of this case against the defendant, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or incomplete deliberation as alleged.
Although the registration of transfer of ownership in the registry is valid because it complies with the substantive relationship, if the document was prepared with a false guarantee or obtained a written confirmation, it constitutes a crime of violation of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Ownership in Real Estate (Law No. 86Do2520, Jan. 20, 1987). Thus, the judgment of the court below to the same effect is justifiable, and there is no error of law
With respect to a judgment on which a fine is imposed as in the instant case, it cannot be deemed a legitimate ground for appeal on the ground of unfair sentencing under the Criminal Procedure Act. All of the arguments are
Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Justices Park Jong-hee (Presiding Justice)