자격모용사문서작성등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.
The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The defendant asserts that there was an error of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles that, since it cannot be deemed that he prepared a register of shareholders with the qualification of the representative director of the G in charge of the dispute resolution or entered false facts in the corporate register of the G in charge of the bankruptcy resolution, the defendant prepared and held a register of shareholders with the qualification of the representative director of the G in charge of the bankruptcy resolution and entered and exercised a register of shareholders in the corporate register of the G in charge of the merger resolution,
(1) Since the defendant acquired all shares of H from the general meeting of shareholders to the general meeting of shareholders, he/she may appoint a representative director, etc., even if he/she is a single shareholder of H and the general meeting of shareholders.
Therefore, it is valid to dismiss Q, T, U, and M as a single shareholder, and to appoint L, O as an internal director, and L as a representative director. Therefore, it cannot be deemed that the shareholder registry prepared in the name of the representative director of the L L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the L of the
② Even if the Defendant was unable to acquire all shares of H from H, the Defendant was determined to have acquired all shares of H at the time, and thus, the Defendant did not have any intention to commit the instant crime.
B. The Defendant asserts that the sentence imposed by the lower court (one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.
2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles
A. The Defendant is a person who is a de facto operator of (ju)E in the facts charged of this case.
On November 19, 2010, the Defendant comprehensively transfers the above commercial building construction business right to the (ju) E, the representative director of the (ju)G, who is the executor of the (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) Gowon-si, Changwon-si (hereinafter “instant commercial building”).