사문서위조등
The defendant shall be innocent.
1. 이 사건 공소사실 피고인은 주식회사 E 대전 점 경영지원 부 소속 과장인바, 2012. 12. 20. 경 대전 서구 F 소재 주식회사 E( 이하 ‘ 이 사건 회사’ 라 한다) 대전 점에서 행사할 목적으로 컴퓨터 워드를 이용하여 백지에 “ 확약서 팡팡( 하늘 정원), 목적물 주소 : 대전 서구 F 주식회사 E 5.5 층, 성명 : G( 대전 서구 H), 주민등록번호 : I ” 이라고 기재한 다음 “ 확약 인은 목적물을 임대함에 있어 모든 시설물 설치와 철거에 대한 책임과 의무를 다할 것을 확약한다 위 내용의 의무를 다하지 않을 경우 어떤 법적 조치라도 감수할 것은 물론 민 형사상의 이의를 제기치 않을 것을 확약합니다.
On December 20, 2012, G, which is undertaking “,” signed and sealed the seal of G at will, thereby forging one copy of the letter of commitment in the name of G, which is a private document concerning rights and obligations (hereinafter “instant letter”), and around September 2013, it was used by submitting to a public official in charge two documents, which is a document duly prepared in the Daejeon Seo-gu Office of Government Daejeon, Daejeon, Daejeon, Daejeon, 189 (U.S., 920) as a building around September 20, 2013.
2. First of all, in light of the fact that the Defendant’s relevant statement on the date of the preparation of the instant undertaking and the process of its preparation is inconsistent with the relevant parties’ statement, and that G resident registration number, which is the name of preparation as indicated in the instant undertaking, is revealed to be another person, there is considerable doubt as to whether the Defendant did not commit a crime of forging or uttering the facts charged.
However, since the crime of forging a private document refers to the preparation of a document by a person who is not authorized to prepare the document in the name of another person, if there was an explicit or implied consent of the nominal owner in preparing the private document, it does not constitute the crime of forging the private document (Supreme Court Decision 198Da13889 delivered on June 1, 198)