beta
Text
The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged is written in the indictment on January 21, 2015, in which the Defendant was working as the branch head B, and the indictment appears to be written in writing as “ January 25, 2015.”
In the election of the president of the Saemaul Treasury, the above Saemaul Treasury was going out.
The Defendant recruited members to exercise the right to vote in support of the Defendant in the election of the above chief director C and D through ar, who are ever, and the above C and D recommended their branch members to join the above Saemaul Treasury as a member, and received from them identification cards, including resident registration certificates, or copies thereof.
Defendant 1 prepared, on behalf of the nominal owner, an application for membership of the above Saemaul Bank on behalf of the said Saemaul Bank’s nominal owner due to the above status card, etc., and did not receive the seal in addition to the identification card, and it is difficult to obtain the seal from each nominal owner, and as it is difficult to obtain the seal from each other on the application form for membership membership, the customers who were kept in the above Saemaul Bank had to seal the lost seal on the said application form.
On December 9, 2013, the Defendant: (a) prepared an application for membership with F, and (b) signed and sealed the seal lost by a person who is not F, on his/her own account; (b) signed the said application at will; and (c) signed and sealed the seal lost by a person who is not F, from the above day to June 30, 2014, on 57 occasions by the aforementioned method as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Table; and (d) kept the said application at the above branch office.
Accordingly, the defendant used the seals of other persons in a fraudulent manner for the purpose of exercising them, and used the seals of other persons in a fraudulent manner.
2. Determination:
A. It is reasonable to interpret that a private use under Article 239(1) of the Criminal Code is limited to the case where it is used as a seal seal (see Supreme Court Decision 73Do3424, Mar. 12, 1974) and it is illegally exercised against the will of the seal holder.