beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.02.22 2017노1785

사문서위조등

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles) that the defendant was issued a power of attorney to transfer the motor vehicle

to be entrusted with the authority to subscribe to insurance.

In light of the overall circumstances at the time when the defendant prepares the instant automobile insurance subscription, such as the fact that it is difficult to see that the intent of the nominal owner is important in the purchase of the automobile insurance, etc., the consent of the nominal owner cannot be presumed to have been presumed to have been given, since the nominal owner had known that the defendant would have prepared the instant automobile

2. In full view of the circumstances in the reasoning of the court below acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, it is justified that the court below determined that the defendant would have naturally accepted the subscription of the automobile insurance of this case if the defendant was aware of the fact that the defendant was to prepare the subscription of this case at the time of the act, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts

3. The appeal by the prosecutor of the conclusion is without merit and is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act.