beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.14 2017노891

무고등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

Reasons

The summary of the grounds for appeal set forth in the reasoning of appeal by March 23, 2017, the Defendant denied all the facts charged in the instant case. However, at the third trial date of the appellate trial, the Defendant stated his defense counsel’s written opinion on June 26, 2017, and reversed and recognized some of the facts charged in the instant case.

In the lower court, Jun. 26, 2017, it is determined based on his/her defense counsel's written opinion.

In fact, misunderstanding of facts, or misunderstanding of legal principles, the facts charged can be classified as 22 facts charged for documents not specified by the name of the title, 22 types of facts charged for documents not specified, 3 types of facts charged for documents in the name of L, and 1 facts charged for documents in the name of M.

[No. 1] The 22 indictments on documents not specified by a nominal person are invalid in violation of the provisions of the Act, as the nominal holder does not specify.

[Type 2] One of the facts charged for documents in the name of L is specified as the nominal owner of the document, but it is not possible to specify which document is deemed as a forged document, inasmuch as the signature shown in either document No. 1, No. 53, 54 of the Evidence Record No. 8178, which was submitted by the prosecutor among four of the total contracts for appointment of instructors in the name of L, attached to the Record No. 8178, which was attached to the Evidence No. 2015, 8178, which was forged.

Therefore, the facts charged about L's nominal documents are also specified.

shall not be deemed to exist.

[Type 3] One of the facts charged for documents in M’s name is written as follows: (a) a document submitted in the form of a fake commission contract (No. 17 of title 2015 [Attachment 1] among documents submitted in M’s name; (b) and a fake commission contract (No. 22 of the Evidence No. 1 of the Evidence Record No. 8178 [Attachment 2015] for compulsory medical treatment; and (c) a document submitted in the form of a fake commission contract (the first five hours of time is KRW 250,000 per hour; and (d) a time from six hours to 130,000 won per hour is not specified; and (e) whether a document was prosecuted by deeming it a forged document.

In addition, a document submitted as a fake contract shall be forged.