Punishment of the offender who has replaced his/her photograph in his/her driver's license

The act of removing a photograph attached to another person's driver's license and attaching his/her photograph on the job constitutes the crime of altering an official document and not the crime of forging an official document.

Article 225 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 4290Du52 delivered on April 12, 1957 (Dakhh 4540 of Supreme Court Decision, Decision 225(2)1297 of the Criminal Act, Decision 383(22)1487 of the Criminal Procedure Act

Defendant

Prosecutor

Busan District Court (72Da748)

We reverse the original judgment.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

The forty-five days of detention days prior to the original sentence shall be included in the original sentence.

The altered part of a copy of a seized driver's license (No. 1) shall be discarded.

The summary of the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor is as follows: (1) as to the use of the altered official document among the facts charged and the violation of the Road Traffic Act, there exists a confession of the defendant and its reinforcement evidence, there is a violation of misunderstanding of facts that the original judgment was acquitted on the ground that there was no such reinforcement evidence; (2) the original judgment removed another person's photograph attached to another person's driver's license and imposed his photograph on the same place, but it is reasonable to constitute an alteration of the official document, and therefore, there is an error in the misapprehension of the official document, and there is an error of law in violation of the principle of no accusation in the original judgment that recognized the case prosecuted due to the alteration of the official document as a crime of forging the official document, and (3) the sentencing of the lower court is excessively unreasonable.

(1) Of the facts charged, with regard to the use of the altered official document and the violation of the Road Traffic Act, the defendant confessions from the police to the original court court's order, as well as according to the contents of the written report on Nonindicted 1 written by the police officer of the Busan Northern Police Station of the Busan (hereinafter referred to as the "Investigation Record") who consented to the defendant as evidence in the trial, it shall be a evidence to reinforce the above confession, but there is no evidence to prove it, and there is an error in the misunderstanding of facts in the original judgment that acquitted the defendant, and (2) remove another person's photograph attached to another person's driver's license and attach the defendant's photograph on the spot, and the act of attaching it shall be established. However, although the original judgment recognizes this fact, there is an error of law of error in the misapprehension of legal principles, since the prosecutor's appeal has two grounds, it is unnecessary to determine the remaining grounds for appeal, and thus, the original judgment shall be reversed pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

The Defendant revoked the driver’s license of a motor vehicle and thereafter does not have a certain occupation.

1. On November 15, 1971 05:00, at the Busan-do Busan-dong Busan-dong, 524 Yyang-si Guard room, the locked thefted a driver’s license for a motor vehicle of category 1 in Busan-type 2-5411, which was in his possession, and was in Busan-type 2-5411, which was in his possession.

2. On January 9, 1972, at the 8th room in the front 524 Bando-dong, for the purpose of exercising vehicle driving service, Nonindicted Party 2’s photograph attached to Nonindicted Party 2’s driver’s license in the name of Busan City Mayor is removed, and the Defendant’s photograph prepared in advance is attached to the Defendant’s name and alters the two official documents, which are the Defendant’s driver’s license.

3. From 20:00 on January 10, 1972 to 20:00 on, the vehicle is driving, without a driver’s license, the vehicle from Busan to 1-4784 on the part of Busan to Masan.

4. On January 10, 1972, 16:00, at the time of the operation of the above taxi on the national highway of Changwon-gun, Changwon-gun, Changwon-gun, Changwon-gun, in Msan, the driver's license of the Msan police station altered as above was revealed by traffic offense, and the altered official document was used by submitting the altered official document to the police officer. The facts of the above ruling are examined.

1. The part of the statement corresponding to it in the original judgment by the defendant;

1. Each statement of the suspect interrogation protocol of the accused in the process of handling the affairs of prosecutor and judicial police officer, corresponding thereto;

1. The part of the written report prepared by Nonindicted Party 1 to the Busan Northern Police Station, which corresponds to this;

1. In full view of the existence, etc., of a copy (No. 1) of a seized driver’s license, there is evidence.

The facts of larceny 1 in the judgment below of the defendant are as follows: Article 329 of the Criminal Code provides that the alteration of official document 2. Article 225 of the Criminal Code provides that the alteration of the document 3. Article 75 (1) 4 and Article 55 of the Road Traffic Act provides that the use of altered official document 4. Articles 29 and 225 of the Criminal Code provide that the use of the document 3. Article 229 of the Road Traffic Act provides that each of the above larceny and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act provides that each of the prescribed types of imprisonment shall be selected for the crime of larceny and the crime of violation of the Road Traffic Act. Since the above punishment is concurrent crimes as provided in the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code, the defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to one year, and the part of the document confiscated prior to the pronouncement of the original sentence shall be included in the number of imprisonment with prison labor for up to 45 days pursuant to Article 57 of the Criminal Code, and the part of the document shall be confiscated and destroyed by Article 384 of the Criminal Code.

Judges Lee Yong-su (Presiding Judge)