공문서부정행사등
The judgment below
Among the crimes of No. 1 of the judgment of the court below, each of the crimes listed in the attached Table No. 1 through No. 5, and the judgment of the court below. 2.
1. The judgment of the party prior to the remanding the scope of the judgment of the court prior to the remanding of the judgment of the court is sentenced to a fine of KRW 3 million for each of the crimes listed in Tables 6 and 7 attached to the judgment of the court below, each of the crimes listed in Tables 1 through 5 attached to the judgment of the court below among the crimes listed in Tables 1 and 5 attached to the judgment of the court below, and each of the crimes listed in Articles 2 through 5 attached to the judgment of the court below among the crimes listed in the judgment of the court below. Since the judgment of the court below reversed and remanded the crimes listed in Tables 1 through 5 of List of Crimes listed in the judgment of the court below among the crimes listed in Articles 1 of the judgment of the court below, the scope of the judgment of the party after remanding is limited to the scope of the above reversal and the remaining crimes except the above part of the reversal
2. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant’s act of photographing a driver’s license borrowed from F with F as a mobile phone was intended for the Defendant to inquire about various expenses or management of vehicles, such as A/S, and the Defendant’s act was not intended to run in F if it was controlled by driving without license, and the Defendant’s act of presenting this part of the facts charged to the police officer to control image files of the driver’s license stored in the Defendant’s cell phone does not constitute an unlawful use of official document. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged or misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) Unlike the facts charged in the lower judgment, the Defendant arbitrarily stated the name of F in the report on the statement of the PH driver’s situation, and did not constitute the forgery of private document, but the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.
3 The instant crime is not a crime committed during the repeated crime period.
Article 35 of the Criminal Act is applied to the judgment of the court below that made a aggravation of repeated crime.