(영문) 부산지방법원 2020.02.06 2019노2049 | 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) 부산지방법원 2020.02.06 2019노2049

사문서위조등

Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant has not prepared a real estate lease contract before his/her birth.

2. The deceased’s statement is made as direct evidence that seems to correspond to the facts charged in the judgment.

The court below rejected the credibility of the deceased’s statement for the following reasons.

① The Defendant asserts that the difference between payment in kind is 100 million won as to the details of the preparation of the real estate lease agreement, and the H’s statement is consistent therewith.

② In the real estate lease contract, the seal in the G name is affixed, and the seal is similar to the seal in the G name used by the deceased for financial transactions.

It is unclear who is in possession of G seal.

It is difficult to exclude the probability that the deceased has affixed a seal in the name of G, and the deceased has affixed a seal in the real estate lease contract.

(3) There is no reason to place a seal in the name of G when the defendant forges a real estate lease contract in the name of the deceased.

In order to recognize the credibility of the deceased’s statement in the appellate trial, the court below’s decision rejecting the credibility of the statement must be acceptable and sufficient and reasonable.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4994, Nov. 24, 2006). Although F made a statement at the appellate court, the lower court’s reasonable doubt is not dismissed, under the following circumstances: (a) in the relevant civil procedure (as Busan District Court Decision 2018Da15976, May 13, 2009, the stamp image affixed on the withdrawn money list and the seal of the real estate lease contract can be identical; and (b) the real estate lease contract was written in around 2015, instead of the latest written real estate lease contract; and (c) the F’s statement alone does not mean that the G seal affixed on the real estate lease contract may have been possessed on the deceased’s side and may have been affixed on the deceased’s around 2015.

According to the trial-oriented principle and the principle of direct examination, the judgment of the court below that rejected the credibility of the deceased's statement shall not be respected.

F’s statement was made from the Deceased.

참조판례

-대법원 2006. 11. 24. 선고 2006도4994 판결

유사 판례

-인천지방법원 2015.01.29 2014고단7825

-부산지방법원 2014.02.04 2013고단1576

-서울남부지방법원 2016.10.12 2016고정1715

-대구지방법원 2014.08.13 2013고정1625

-창원지방법원 통영지원 2013.04.18 2012고단807