(영문) 대전지방법원 2019.10.24 2018노3517 | 리걸엔진

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) 대전지방법원 2019.10.24 2018노3517

무고등

Text

The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

The defendant shall be exempted from punishment.

The judgment below

part of acquittal.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) Inasmuch as there is no forgery of the written confirmation of payment (hereinafter “instant payment confirmation”) dated January 22, 2013, Defendant 1 did not constitute an attempted litigation fraud premised on this premise.

B) On the ground that the Defendant had forged and exercised the instant payment confirmation form, the judgment became final and conclusive upon conviction as to the charge of forging private documents and uttering of the said private document, as stated in the first head of the crime indicated in the judgment below, and thus, res judicata of the said final and conclusive judgment shall also affect the instant attempted fraud, and thus, a judgment of acquittal should be rendered. (2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (five million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence that correspond to the facts charged on November 5, 2014, the prosecutor 1) found that the Defendant prepared a false complaint with the intent to cause E to be subject to criminal punishment, such as the facts charged, and submitted it to the prosecution to the prosecution.

B) The termination certificate of January 22, 2013 (hereinafter “instant termination certificate”) is deemed as the “instant termination certificate.”

In full view of the evidence that correspond to the facts charged as to the fabrication of private documents and the display of private documents, it is recognized that the Defendant forged the certificate of termination of the instant case as stated in this part of the facts charged and submitted it to the court for its use. 2) The lower court’s sentence is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles regarding the Defendant’s assertion that the Defendant did not forge the instant payment confirmation, the lower court also asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part, and according to the terms and conditions of the lease agreement between the Defendant and E, the agreement between the Defendant’s father and E, and the record of the lease agreement between the Defendant’s father and E, the Defendant two months

유사 판례

-울산지방법원 2013.05.09 2012고단3158

-울산지방법원 2017.08.22 2017가단50333

-서울서부지방법원 2015.10.07 2015고단2122

-수원지방법원성남지원 2017.10.18 2016가단221886

-대구지방법원 2015.02.13 2014노3701