(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2017.06.07 2017고정427

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2017.06.07 2017고정427

사문서위조등

Text

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

Reasons

1. Summary of the facts charged

A. The Defendant, who was in charge of C’s general affairs from January 1, 2007 to February 7, 2007, was a person who was in charge of C’s general affairs. In order to sell the land owned by the clan D and E to F, the Defendant thought to prepare the minutes of the clan representatives necessary for the transfer of ownership. On April 8, 2012, at the Defendant’s residence located in Busan Shipping Daegu G and 111 Dong 401, Dong 401, around April 8, 2012, the Defendant prepared “C’s meeting minutes” for the purpose of exercising, using a computer, stating “the name of H and I and kept in custody of H and I without the consent or permission of H and I after printing out the list of representatives.”

H and I affixed their seals arbitrarily to the column for the meeting minutes.

As a result, the Defendant forged a “C Council’s original minutes” in the name of H and I, a private document on the proof of facts.

B. On May 30, 2012, the Defendant: (a) around 17:46 on May 30, 2012, issued the said investigation document to the employees of the said registry office, who are aware of the fact that the “C Council minutes minutes” in the name of H and I that were forged and I were duly constituted.

2. At the time of the Defendant’s assertion, H and I consented to the preparation of the instant minutes as seen above.

3. Determination

A. The crime of forgery or alteration of a private document refers to the preparation of a document in the name of another person by a person who is not authorized to prepare and alter the private document. Therefore, if the person who is not authorized to prepare and alter the private document explicitly or implicitly consented to the preparation and alteration of the private document, it does not constitute the crime of forgery or alteration of the private document. Meanwhile, even if there was no real consent of the nominal owner at the time of the act, but if the nominal owner knew of the fact at the time of the act, it is presumed that he/she naturally accepted

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2018.02.22 2017노2310

-대전지방법원 2015.02.06 2014고단3284

-제주지방법원 2015.07.16 2015노46

-광주지방법원 2013.07.24 2013노1068

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.11.18 2016노3186