2014Gohap496 A. Abandonment, etc.

(b) False entry into public electronic records;

(c) Events such as false statements and electromagnetic records;

1. A. (b) . (c) 00 (81 - 2) , hospital administrative officers;

2.(c) EO (78 - 2) and Company Board;

Lee Jong-chul (Lawsuits) and Kim Jong-Un (Trial)

Law Firm Han-jin, Attorneys Im Sung-jin (Attorney Yang Sung-jin, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Attorney Yoon Ho-won (Law No. 500, Jun. 1, 200)

December 10, 2014

The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than four years, and the defendant shall be punished by a fine not exceeding 5,000,000 won. If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won shall be confined in a workhouse for the period converted into one day.

To order the provisional payment of an amount equivalent to the above fine against the defendant 00.

Criminal facts

1. The Defendants’ crime of conspiracy: Defendant 00, on September 26, 201, found a method to adopt a son who did not occur after marriage with her husband's 00 on September 26, 201. On September 26, 201, Defendant 1 would find a person who would raise Defendant 1 to her son on the Internet website of the early police in 2012. “I want to read her comments and raise her son.”

The Defendants made a false statement on the identity, etc. of a patient (here) under the hospitalization agreement, and concluded a false birth certificate as if they were born between the Defendant 00 and 00 (the birth of September 17, 2012) and the Defendant 10, and conspired to register the same in the family relation register.

On September 24, 2012, Defendant Yang-O prepared a birth report and a birth certificate, etc. to the public official in charge of the above Myeon office who is aware of the fact that the above 00 was a child born by Defendant Yang-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si-si (hereinafter referred to as Defendant Yang-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O-O had the above public official enter the birth report and a birth certificate, etc. prepared falsely as above, and

As a result, the Defendants conspired to make a false report to a public official to enter false facts in the family relations register, which is a public electronic record, and exercised by allowing a public official to keep it at the same time.

2. Defendant YangO: Abandonment;

The defendant is a legal mother of the victim Lee O (10 months after the birth) and has a legal duty to protect and support the victim. The victim is a child who cannot take action necessary for daily life without the parent or other person's assistance because he/she is unable to take food by himself/herself and his/her body is difficult.

The Defendant, as above, reported the birth of the victim as the natural father between the Defendant and her husband, and was raising the victim in the Yangju-si, North Korea-ro 966 - 8 shock apartment in the Yangju-si. On January 2013, 2013, the Defendant was aware that the Defendant’s mother did not have the victim’s her father-child with the Defendant and her father-child, and caused the conflict with the Defendant’s mother. From around that time, the married couple’s relationship aggravated, and the Defendant got 00 victims to care of the victim almost all over all without the Defendant’s her birth or eating her part.

On May 2013, the Defendant returned to 100 and 200 on the Internet hosting that he came to know through the Internet Twitting, and neglected to care for the victim, such as drinking milk to the victim at low time and drinking 00 on the next day, and entering the house on the next day. In 200, the Defendant’s withdrawal was decided to live together with the above 00 when he was unable to use the money left by bringing about the passbook of living expenses without any answer to the Defendant’s request for divorce.

On July 6, 2013, 2013, the Defendant knew that 00 had a house to participate in military education for a period of two months from the beginning of the beginning of July 2013, and provided the victim with the knowledge of the fact that she had left the house at the lower home of the above Defendant on July 15, 2013, and provided the victim with the knowledge of the fact that she had a house, or requested the victim to protect.

From that time to August 30, 2013, the victim was abandoned by neglecting the victim at the defendant's house by failing to take any measure, and caused the victim's death by getting the victim to death by getting the victim neglected to the defendant's house.

Summary of Evidence

1. The respective legal statements of the Defendant 00 and the Defendant 200

1. Legal statement of 00 witnesses;

1. Some statements made by the prosecution concerning the defendant 200 in each protocol of examination of suspect;

1. Some statements in suspect interrogation protocol of the police as to Defendant 200 (four times) and suspect interrogation protocol of the police (five times)

1. Part of statement 00 among the interrogation protocol of the police officers against the defendant YangO (three times, three times, and three times)

1. A copy of the interrogation protocol of 00; and

1. Statement made by the police at 00 and 00 each police station;

1. A statement of the preceding 00 statements;

1. A situation report and an occurrence report;

1. A written autopsy report and the result of autopsy of victims;

1. A copy, such as a copy, etc. of the divorce statement, a detailed statement of use of credit cards, a copy of a notice of persons eligible for persons eligible for childcare fees for infants and young children, a certified copy of the resident registration card, a family relation document, etc., a copy of the diagnosis and treatment set, a copy of the birth report and

1. Court rulings of the first and second general military court (00), and court rulings of the second and second instances (00); and

1. Scenesics of the change site, a photo of the changeer or a CCTV of a suspect's residential apartment;

1. A report on internal investigation (Attachment of a certified copy, etc. of resident registration), a report on investigation (a copy of a report of birth), a report on investigation (a copy of a report of birth attached), a report on internal investigation (a report of birth attached to a spring father and an internal investigation), a report on investigation (a report on the presumption of the death of a victim), a report on investigation (a CCTV analysis, suspect and access records) and a report on investigation (a written statement of intent to issue a certificate of birth attached);

Application of Statutes

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

(a) Defendant YangO: Articles 275(1), 271(1) (a) of the Criminal Act, Articles 228(1), 30 (a) of the Criminal Act, Article 229, 228(1), and 30 (a) of the Criminal Act, Article 229, 228(1), and 30 (a) of the Criminal Act (the fact that an application for a false entry in public electronic records, etc., is made and choice of imprisonment is made);

(b) Defendant Lee 00: Articles 228(1) and 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of entry in public electromagnetic records, etc., selection of fines), 229, 228(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act (the point of exercising false entry, public electromagnetic records, etc., and choice of fines);

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

(a) Quantity of defendants: the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act. Article 50 (Concurrent Crimes Concerning Death and Injury with Gross Mutandis Punishment)

(b) Defendant Lee 00: the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act. Article 50 (Concurrent Punishment Concerning Crimes concerning False Statements, Public Records, and Electronic Records, etc., with any heavier Crimes)

1. Invitation of a workhouse;

Defendant 00: Articles 70 and 69(2) of the former Criminal Act (Amended by Act No. 12575, May 14, 2014)

1. Order of provisional payment;

Defendant 00: Judgment on the allegations by the Defendants and defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The Defendants agreed to adopt 00 as to the adoption between the Defendant’s twoOs and the Defendant’s one who is the mother of 00, to the Defendant’s twoOs and her husband’s two hundreds. Accordingly, the Defendants reported the birth of Os as the father of the Defendant Yangyang and her husband’s two hundreds. As such, the above birth report conforms to the substantive legal relationship with the effect of the adoption, the crime of false entry into public electronic records, etc., and the crime of uttering of false entry into public electronic records,

On the other hand, Article 874 (1) of the former Civil Act, which was in force at the time of the birth report of this case (amended by Act No. 11300, Feb. 10, 2012), provides that when a person with a spouse is adopted, the person with a spouse should jointly be adopted with the spouse. The following facts acknowledged by each evidence in the judgment, namely, ① this0 had already been reported in the status of birth under the knowledge of the “in this court,” and lasts later than the end of the birth report. The person was raising the foster mother to the foster mother and subsequently consented to the adoption. Before the consent, the person had already been registered in the family register in this court.

20.1.1. He visited 0 or more parents of this case through the adoption system, and asked 0 or more of 0 birth report to the effect that he had no actual effect on the adoption. 4. The 0.0 statement was made 0 or more different from 0. The 0.0 statement that he had no effect on the adoption, and that he had no actual effect on the birth report of 0 or less than 0. The 0.0 statement was made to the effect that he had no effect on the birth report of 0 or less, and that he had no effect on the birth report of 0 or less than 0. The 0.0 statement was made to the effect that he had no effect on the birth report of 0 or less, and that he had no effect on the birth report of 0 or less, the 0.0 statement was made to the effect that he had no effect on the birth report of 0 or less, and that he had no effect on the birth report of 0 or less, the 0.00 statement that he had no effect on the birth report.

2. Defendant 00 argues that the crime of abandonment was not established on the ground that Defendant 1 knew of the fact that 00 education was provided at around July 6, 2013 at the time of leaving the house, but the accurate date was unaware, and that 00 was left the house with the victim and left the house, so it cannot be said that the victim was abandoned, that 00 was neglected, and that 00 would result in the death of the victim, it cannot be entirely predicted that the crime of abandonment was not established.

The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence in the holding, namely, ① childcare takes full charge of Defendant 00, the full charge of the occupational father, ② 00, without regard to the victim, or was engaged in the game, even when entering the offshore house, and the franchisium did not go up once, and the franchisium did not go to the victim, even though the franchisium did not go to the victim, even if the franchis were in a situation where the franchisO did not interfere with the franchis, the franchis00 did not take all measures for the victim, such as requesting the franchis to care for the victim, or informing the fact that the franchis were going to go to the franchis, ② Defendant Yangyang Franchis or the flachis’ parents did not have any flusium, and in particular, in the case of the franchiste.

1. On the 0th anniversary of the fact that the victim had no knowledge of the adoption from 00 days to 0, 10 days before the 0th anniversary of the fact that the victim had no knowledge of these facts, 20 days before the 0th day of this investigation, 30 days before the 0th day of this investigation, and 4 days after the 0th day of this investigation, the number of the victims could not be changed to 0th day before the 0th day of this investigation, and 3 days after the 0th day of this investigation, the victim could not have any contact with 0th day of this investigation, 4 days after the 0th day of this investigation, and 10 days after the 0th day of this investigation.

Reasons for sentencing

1. The Defendant 200 crime committed the crime of this case by 00 was committed by the adoption of the victim, with the birth report in a false manner as his natural father's child, and neglecting the victim who was only ten months after her birth, resulting in the death of the victim. The crime of this case is very poor in the nature of the crime, the extreme pain and suffering of the victim who died without any food for a long time, and the Defendant 200 also neglected the rearing of the victim, such as drinking milk to the victim and going back to the country after a long time. In light of the fact that the Defendant 200 neglected the rearing of the victim, the Defendant 200 should be punished strictly.

However, the facts that Defendant 200 was the first offender are considered as favorable circumstances in favor of Defendant 200, and the other 00 was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of abandonment of the victim of this case at the High Military Court on July 8, 2014 (No. 201487) and the above judgment at the Supreme Court on September 4, 2014.

A punishment as ordered shall be determined by comprehensively taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the final and conclusive final and conclusive appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court Decision 201459023; (b) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (c) the records of the instant case and the conditions of sentencing specified in the trial process, including

2. The instant crime committed by Defendant 00 is a serious hazard to the establishment, maintenance, etc. of family relations, which are the fundamental order of our society. Although it is not good to form a crime that damages transparency and trust in public affairs, such as birth and adoption, Defendant 00 is recognized as the facts of the instant crime, and Defendant 00 is the primary offender, etc. are considered as favorable circumstances in favor of Defendant 200, taking into account the following as a whole: age, character and behavior, environment, motive, means, means, and result of the instant crime; and the various circumstances, such as the circumstances after the crime, etc., which are the conditions for sentencing specified in the instant records and trial process, shall be determined as per the order.

Judges of the presiding judge;

Judges Domen

Judges Yellow support-