Whether a person who is not a judicial clerk is punished for mediating the commission of preparing documents for registration to a judicial clerk at the request of a third party.

The act of arranging the commission of the preparation of application documents for registration to a judicial assistant at the request of a third party by a person who is not a judicial assistant, shall not be punished unless there is any provision punishing such commission.

Articles 3, 40, and 40

Defendant

Prosecutor

Chuncheon District Court Decision 79No385 delivered on February 29, 1980

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the facts affirmed by the judgment of the court of first instance, according to the facts affirmed by the judgment of the court of first instance, the defendant arranged an application relation to registration to the Park Jong-dae, who is the judicial secretary upon request by the Kim Sung-nam and Song-chul, and prepared and submitted the application document for registration to the registry. According to the facts of this case, according to the above facts, the defendant accepted the application at the request of the court of first instance, and then let the judicial secretary prepare the application for registration of ownership.

2. Article 2(1) of the Judicial Secretariat Act provides that the duties of a judicial secretary shall be to prepare documents submitted to a court and a prosecutor’s office on commission and in remuneration by others, and Article 3(1) provides that a person, other than a judicial secretary, shall not engage in the duties provided for in Article 2 as a business, and Article 40 provides that a judicial clerk shall not engage in the duties provided for in Article 2 as a business, and shall be punished for

3. In light of the records, the judgment of the court of first instance which affirmed the judgment of the defendant, which acquitted the defendant, cannot be deemed to have borrowed the name of the judicial secretary in the name of the judicial secretary, such as the theory of lawsuit, and the defendant cannot be deemed to have used the documents related to the application for registration in the name of the judicial secretary, unless there are circumstances to deem that the defendant was engaged in the business of the judicial secretary, it cannot be punished for the reason that there is a need to regulate such act unless there is a provision regulating the act of arranging the commission of documents to the judicial secretary. Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance which affirmed the judgment of the court of first instance which acquitted the defendant is just and therefore

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

Justices Park So-young (Presiding Justice)