[1] The meaning of "other general legal cases" and "other legal affairs" under Article 109 (1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act

[2] Whether an act of inspecting a certified real estate registry to verify and investigate the relationship of rights registered on the registry, or to enter its contents in documents such as a report, etc., constitutes “legal affairs” under Article 109 subparag. 1 of the Attorney-at-Law Act (negative)

[1] Article 109 subparagraph 1 of the Attorney-at-Law Act / [2] Article 109 subparagraph 1 of the Attorney-at-Law Act

[1] [2] Supreme Court Decision 96Do2340 delivered on August 21, 1998 (Gong1998Ha, 2361)

Defendant

Prosecutor

Law Firm Woo et al.

Seoul High Court Decision 2006No803 decided January 12, 2007

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act

The lower court affirmed the first instance judgment that found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the charges on the grounds stated in its reasoning, on the grounds that there was no proof of crime.

In light of the records, the "other general legal cases" listed in Item 1 of Article 109 of the Attorney-at-Law Act, among the judgment of the court below, refers to a dispute or question as to legal rights and obligations, the occurrence of new rights and obligations relations, and the "other legal affairs" in the same Article refers to the processing of matters that generate, modify, or extinguish legal effects, and preserve or clarify legal effects. Thus, the court below's determination that the so-called legal analysis affairs of analyzing the legal relations of real estate rights and the legal affairs of Article 109 subparagraph 1 of the Attorney-at-Law Act are clearly applicable to the legal affairs of Article 109 subparagraph 1 of the Attorney-at-Law Act, but it does not admit that the part of the court below's judgment which cited the legal affairs of Article 109 subparagraph 1 of the Attorney-at-Law Act, which is merely a kind of act of fact-finding, such as confirmation or investigation as to whether the real estate register was registered, provisional seizure, provisional disposition, etc., or transfer the contents thereof as it is a document.

2. As to the violation of the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act

Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the records, the court below is justified in finding the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence as to intentional act, as alleged in the grounds of appeal

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Yang Sung-tae (Presiding Justice)