위조사문서행사
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. The Defendant (De facto mistake) forged the sale contract and the confirmation document in the name of E as shown in the facts charged in the instant case and used it, and the fact that E comprehensively delegated the preparation of the above sale contract and the confirmation document to the Defendant, but the lower court convicted the Defendant by misunderstanding the fact.
B. The prosecutor (unfair punishment) of the lower court (two years of suspended sentence in August) is deemed to be too unhued and unfair.
2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant
A. On December 14, 1995, the Defendant completed the construction of 144 units of multi-household housing in the Seoul-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Sungnam-si, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Defendant on August 28, 2007, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in D on August 3, 2009, when the head of Seocho Tax Office imposed capital gains tax of 44,393,530 won on the Defendant on August 3, 2009, in order to not pay capital gains tax on the above 1,406 units of 1,406 units of 1,406 units of the above E, the Defendant was willing to bring a lawsuit against the head of Seocho Tax Office to cancel the disposition of capital gains tax by submitting the sales contract, etc. under the name of the said E.
On August 23, 2010, the Defendant filed an administrative litigation against the head of Seocho-gu Seoul Administrative Court on the Seoul Administrative Court located in Yang Jae-dong 25-3, Seocho-gu, Seoul, to revoke a disposition imposing capital gains tax of KRW 44,393,530, which imposes capital gains tax on the head of Seocho-gu, and exercised the sales contract under the name of E, which was forged to submit to the distribution tax secretary in relation to the report of non-taxation for one household on October 2002.
B. The lower court’s judgment: (i) the above sales contract or confirmation of the fact, and (ii) the lease contract for the above housing did not have a self-written signature, in particular, as follows.