beta
(영문) 창원지방법원 2013.12.12 2013노1458

사문서위조등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The operating members of the PyeongtaekD Association E branch (hereinafter referred to as the “E branch”) of the grounds for appeal have a fact that they keep their seals in the E branch office and delegate the minutes to the head of the E branch office for convenience whenever a meeting is held, and the head of the branch office has affixed their seals on behalf of the members present.

On January 9, 2011, the Defendant, as the head of E branch, held the E branch operation committee in the E branch conference room, and 10 of the 15 operating committee members attended the meeting, and 677m2 of the F warehouse site in Dong-si, Dong-si, Dong-si, the property owned by E branch (hereinafter “instant warehouse site”), was resolved on the number of 7, 2, and 1 of the operating committee members present at the above meeting, and the Defendant, as the Defendant, prepared and arranged the minutes in accordance with the result of the above meeting.

At the time, H was present as an auditor qualification and signed on the list of participants.

After all, the defendant presented minutes and a list of participants to a certified judicial scrivener for the registration of transfer of ownership of the warehouse site of this case. However, a certified judicial scrivener requested minutes and a list of participants who are not signed and sealed. Accordingly, the defendant prepared a new minutes and a list of participants of the Steering Committee, and affixed a seal on the H's name kept in the E-branch office for convenience.

Therefore, the Defendant’s act was signed and sealed by H’s implied delegation of H on the minutes of this case and the list of participants. Thus, the Defendant’s act did not constitute the crime of forging private documents, the crime of not uttering of private documents, or the Defendant did not intend to commit the crime of forging private documents or uttering private documents.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of each of the charges of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.