logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2012.11.15 2012고단5481
사서명위조등
Text

As to the crimes set forth in Article 1 of the judgment of the defendant, a fine of KRW 1,00,000, and the crimes set forth in Articles 2 and 3 of the judgment shall be punished.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

[criminal power] On August 17, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to two years and six months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Seoul Eastern District Court on August 25, 201, and the judgment was finalized on August 25, 2012. On November 25, 201, the Seoul Central District Court sentenced three years of imprisonment for a crime of fraud at the Seoul Central District Court, and is still pending in the appeal trial.

【Criminal Facts】

1. On June 27, 201, from around 22:00 to around 23:50 of the same day, the Defendant, along with Y, Z, AAB, AB, and AC, divided each of the cards into seven by using 52 copies of the cards within the Dongmun-gun Office of Gangseo-gu, Gangwon-gu, Seoul, the following numbers were the same and continuous number of the cards, or the sum of the cards held by all or less of the card numbers, under the rules, such as dumping the card with the same and continuous number of the same card or pattern, into the floor, was the person who set up the largest number, and the other persons with the largest number were 1,00 to 1,00 won in sequence, plus 1,00 won to 5,00 won.

2. The Defendant committed unlawful uttering of official document, forgery of a private signature, and the use of a false investigation or signature to commit acts as if he were AE in order to conceal the fact that he was designated by the police officer when he was subject to control due to gambling under paragraph (1).

On June 28, 2011, at around 00:15, the Defendant requested a police officer to produce an identification card at the office of the Yong-gu Police Station Team in Yeongdeungpo-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, 947-1, and presented a copy of AE’s driver’s license as if he was his driver’s license, the Defendant denied the above driver’s license, which is an official document under the name of the

B. The Defendant, at the same time and time as the AE at the above office, entered “AE” in the column for confirmation of the letter of arrest of flagrant offenders without authority.

Accordingly, the defendant has forged the above AE signature for the purpose of exercising, and at that time, he knows such fact.

arrow