사문서위조등
The judgment of the first instance shall be reversed.
The sentence against the accused shall be 500,000 won.
The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.
1. The judgment of the court of this case on February 2, 201, on the following grounds: (a) mistake of the gist of the grounds for appeal or misunderstanding of legal principles (i) the defendant did not obtain the explicit consent of D at the time of the preparation of the instant share transfer contract; (b) although D had implied consent, or even if D did not do so, D did not comply with the above conditions even though it issued and delivered a written confirmation confirming that the defendant would restore the shares to its original state without any conditions when it did not meet certain conditions when acquiring the shares of this case; (c) at least D’s consent at the time of the preparation of the said share transfer and takeover contract; and (d) even without the constructive consent, the defendant’
A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court and the trial court, the defendant, at the time of the preparation of the stock transfer contract of this case, testified unfavorable to D in the fraudulent case against D in the fraudulent case against D, and the defendant did not cooperate with D in preparing and requesting the instant stock transfer contract of this case (Evidence No. 61, 62 pages of the evidence record), so long as it is acknowledged that the defendant prepared the instant stock transfer contract of this case (Evidence No. 61, 62 pages of the record), it cannot be deemed that D had the presumed consent at the time of the preparation of the instant stock transfer contract of this case, and it is difficult to view that D explicitly consented to it, and each of the above arguments of the defendant disputing this issue cannot be accepted.
B. Second, as to the argument, it is difficult to see that the defendant's act is a justifiable act that satisfies all the requirements of legitimacy of purpose, reasonableness of means, balance of legal interests, urgency, and supplement, and it is also difficult to see that the defendant's act is not illegal. Therefore
C. As to the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing.