beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the loan certificate on June 10, 201, and the contract for construction work made on February 17, 2011, under the name of the defendant was forged. Accordingly, the defendant only filed a complaint on the forgery of each private document and the use of each private document and each falsified investigation document. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below which judged otherwise and sentenced the defendant guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.
2. Determination
A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court on June 10, 201, the following circumstances can be acknowledged.
① From around 2008 to around three years, the Defendant and D brought about adjoining neighbors. D’s husband E receives a new house construction work from the Defendant around February 2, 201, and completed the said construction work around July 201 (hereinafter “instant construction work”). (2) The Defendant was forged.
On June 10, 2011, the loan certificate in the name of the defendant alleged as the defendant stated the following contents: "won 40 million won, the date of maturity for payment: Interest: August 16, 2011: 270,000 won per month:" while the "debtor" includes the defendant's signature, resident registration number, address, contact information, etc. (hereinafter "the loan certificate of this case"). (3) The defendant filed a lawsuit against E in lieu of defective repair in relation to the construction of this case, and E submitted the loan certificate of this case as evidence during the lawsuit.
The judgment of the court of first and second instances recognized the authenticity of the instant loan and the fact that the Defendant borrowed KRW 40 million from D respectively. The judgment of the Supreme Court that dismissed the Defendant’s appeal was rendered on May 19, 2015 [the Changwon District Court 2012 group 16684, group 12013 group 12016 group 12016 group 12016 group, the same court 2014 group 899, 905 group 899, the Supreme Court 2015 group 9813, and 9820 (Counterclaim), and hereinafter “instant civil lawsuit”). ④ The Defendant first acknowledged the authenticity of the instant loan in the instant civil lawsuit, and signed the Defendant on other documents.