사문서위조등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant, as a loan intermediary, was a loan broker, and instead, upon the K’s request that the loan was insufficient to obtain a guarantee, set up a collateral security on the F’s attached “G G-ro 162С and two-story detached houses on its ground” (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the offer of a collateral for the said loan from K. Thus, there was no intention to commit a crime of forgery.
In addition, the Defendant merely instructed M, who is an employee, to conduct the business of establishing the right to collateral security on the instant real estate, and did not directly delegate the right to collateral security to E, or did not instruct E to establish a letter of delegation and written confirmation in the name of F to be forged.
(The power of attorney and the confirmation document are all forged and falsified. However, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the crime of forging private documents and the crime of uttering of private documents is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
2. Determination:
A. Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant ex officio, the prosecutor examined the facts charged at the trial, and the prosecutor changed the facts charged to the effect that "the defendant committed each of the crimes in this case in collusion with E," and applied for the amendment of indictment with the purport that "Article 30 of the Criminal Act" is added to applicable provisions of law, and the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any longer because the subject of the judgment was changed by the permission of this court.
However, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this will be examined.
B. (1) On May 28, 2009, the summary of the facts charged that was revised in the trial at the trial at the trial, the Defendant delegated the establishment of the right to collateral security on the F-owned real estate to E, who is the chief secretary of the D Judicial Scriveners Office, and caused E to indicate the real estate: 1.