사문서위조등
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.
However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (one year of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too uneasy and unreasonable.
2. Before the judgment on the grounds of appeal on the grounds of appeal, we examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the facts charged of this case, since the defendant forged a private document using H, a third party, in the form of indirect principal offender, the applicable provisions of the judgment of the court below did not contain "Articles 34(1) and 31(1) of the Criminal Act", the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any longer.
(3) The court below's decision is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the prosecutor's argument of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act and it is again decided as follows.
Criminal facts
Since the main text of the judgment of the court below is the same as the corresponding column of the judgment below, it is cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.
Application of Statutes
1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act, Articles 231, 34(1), and 31(1) of the Criminal Act (the act of aiding private documents), Articles 234 and 231 of the Criminal Act, Article 35(1) of the Criminal Act (the act of using private documents), the choice of imprisonment for a crime, and the choice of imprisonment for a crime;
1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;
1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);
1. The amount of embezzlement of this case for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is not a large amount, and the defendant did not agree with the victim of embezzlement, but the defendant partly recovered the victim of embezzlement, deposited 10 million won for the victim of embezzlement in the court below, and the amount of damage claimed by the victim of embezzlement appears to be a matter of civil resolution.