Definitions of an event in the crime of uttering such as forged documents

An exercise in the crime of uttering of forged documents, etc. refers to the use of forged documents, etc. in accordance with the means of the usefulness of such documents as if the authentic documents or contents thereof are true documents, and it does not necessarily mean that the offender himself/herself presents them.

Defendant

Prosecutor

Seoul High Court Decision 74No1175 delivered on January 23, 1975

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The Seoul High Prosecutors' Office Kim Tae-won's ground of appeal is examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, on August 18, 1974, the court below found that the defendant presented a resident registration certificate, which is an official document that the defendant was possessed by forging to a police officer in early August 18, 1974, on the roads near the Masan-gun, Asan-gun, which was inspected by the defendant on the roads near the Masan-gun, and used for the use of the official document, which was held by the defendant. The above Matern was demanded to present the resident registration certificate by conducting an inspection at the place of the investigation as a large official, on the facts that the above Matern was located in the house located in the 2nd district of Yangyang-do, Yangyang-do, which was located in the house located in the middle of the Masan-gun, and was searched at the above house above, and found that the defendant met the name of the Mayang-do under the name of the non-indicted 507 military unit, and it did not meet the requirements for the use of the document by the defendant on the ground that the defendant was false.

However, “exercise” in the crime of uttering of forged documents, etc. refers to the use of forged documents, etc. in accordance with the method of the utility of such documents, as if the authentic documents or contents thereof are true documents, and it does not necessarily mean that the offender himself/herself directly presents them. In this case, according to the facts acknowledged by the court below, even though the defendant does not directly produce the forged resident registration certificates, it cannot be deemed that the defendant was presented by him/her and that it was used in accordance with its utility.

Therefore, the court below's decision that the above act of the defendant did not constitute an exercise of forged official document was affected by the misunderstanding of the legal principles as to the crime of uttering of forged documents, etc., which affected the conclusion of the judgment. Thus, the prosecutor's appeal is justified. Thus, this case is obvious that a public prosecution has been instituted on the ground that the defendant had a concurrent relation with the facts such as fabrication and uttering of forged official document, etc., which has already been convicted, and the facts such as the crime of uttering are concurrent crimes as provided in the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Thus, the court below's decision is reversed in

Justices Yang Byung-ho (Presiding Justice)