2016 Highest 3521 - 1 (Separation)

(b) Fraud;

(c) Forgery of private documents;

(d) Exercising a falsified investigation document;

2016 early 1944 Application for a compensation order

1. A. D. A., free of office

2.(a)(d)B, operation of restaurants;

3.(c) d. C and Noise shop:

Lee Jong-hunon (prosecutions) and Gambling (Public Trial)

Attorney Kim Tae-tae (Defendant A's national election)

Applicant Maximum ○○ Address: Seoul Gangnam-gu

September 23, 2016

The defendant A and C shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months and by imprisonment with prison labor for two months.

An application filed by an applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

The defendant C is not guilty of the charge of aiding and abetting private documents.

The summary of the judgment on the acquittal shall be published.

Facts of crime

Criminal Power

on March 26, 2015, Defendant A was sentenced to four months of imprisonment for a crime of fraud in this court and on March 3, 2015.

30. The judgment became final and conclusive.

On November 18, 2014, Defendant B was sentenced to imprisonment of two years and six months for the crime of forging private documents in this court, etc., and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 29, 2015.

On October 30, 2014, Defendant C was sentenced to the suspension of the execution of six months of imprisonment due to the charge of forging private documents, etc. in this court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on November 7, 2014.

Criminal facts

The Defendants and ○○○, through the use of the forged Kim Bale lease agreement or the resident registration certificate, knew to have the money divided by acquiring money by means of borrowing money as security. Accordingly, Defendant C introduced the maximum ○○○ to lend money as security, and the ○○ would be the best as Kim Bale.

1. Uttering of a falsified investigation document and fraud;

Around November 7, 2012, a notary public of No. 101, Nam-gu, Incheon, Nam-ro 185-ro 185, 28, at the office of law firm name, Defendant A lent 70 million won to the victim least ○○ who was introduced by Defendant C. The deposit money of ○○ apartment-dong ○○○○ apartment-dong, Gyeyang-gu, Incheon, ○○○○○○ apartment-dong ○○○○○○○, which is the whole house, was located in the Republic of Korea. It would be notarized because it was said that the owner of the set of the set of the set of houses, who is the owner of the set of houses, was also in the Republic of Korea.

However, Defendant A did not have entered into a lease agreement with Kim Bright, an owner of ○○ apartment ○○○ Dong, but did not have any intent or ability to repay even if he borrowed money from the victim, and Defendant ○○ was the only part of the victim to be Kim Bright in order to belong to the victim.

The Defendants received 70 million won from the victim to the account of Defendant A's community credit cooperatives on the same day.

2. Exercising forged official documents;

In the above date, at the same time, ○○, in accordance with Defendant B, A, and public offering, he carried out as if he were Kim Il-young, and on August 2012, ○○○ was using the Defendant’s photographic file of certification of his ○○○, Defendant 1, who was then forged in advance, *****************, the date of issuance on March 6, 200, by presenting to the ○○○○, as if he were actually issued one copy of the resident registration certificate of Kim Jong-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City, which is a public document under the name of the head of Nam-dong Incheon Metropolitan City, the Defendant B, and A exercised one copy of the resident registration certificate, which is a forged public document, in collusion with his ○○,.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendants’ respective legal statements

1. Each prosecutor's protocol of examination of the accused B and A;

1. Each police statement concerning ○○○;

1. A copy of real estate lease contract, loan application form, bond transfer and takeover contract, passbook deposit certificate, loan contract, notarial deed, and resident registration certificate (UBS);

1. Previous convictions indicated in judgment: Criminal records, written judgments, previous records and results confirmations, and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes;

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

Defendants: Articles 347(1), 30(a), 234, 231, and 30(the use of the above investigative document, the choice of imprisonment) of the Criminal Act; Articles 229, 225, and 30(the use of forged official document, the choice of imprisonment) of the Criminal Act

1. Handling concurrent crimes;

Defendants: the latter part of Article 37 and Article 39(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Defendants: former part of Article 37, Articles 38(1)2 and 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Dismissal of an application for compensation order;

Article 32 (1) 3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings is organized, planned, that the act of defraudation by the Defendants was a planned act, the amount of defraudation was not significant, the degree of sharing among the Defendants in this case, the profits the Defendants acquired from the crime in this case, the profits the victims did not want to punish Defendant B, and the "written agreement and written application for no punishment was submitted to this court" that the defendants do not want to be punished. Each crime stated in the judgment of the Defendants in the crime committed in the judgment of the court and concurrent crimes under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act must be considered at the same time in relation to the crime recorded in the judgment of the court and the crime committed in the judgment of the defendants. The defendants' criminal records prior to the crime in this case and the defendants' age, occupation, character and behavior, environment, family relationship, motive and consequence of the crime, the means and consequence of

The acquittal portion

1. Summary of the facts charged

○ The act of aiding and abetting private documents against Defendant C

Defendant C, in collusion with ○○○, A, and B on July 2012, at the main point of "Sure B's operation in Gyeyang-gu, Incheon, Odong," "○○○ apartment-dong, ○○○ apartment-dong, ○○○○○○○, ○○ apartment-dong, ○○○○○, ○○○○○, ○○, ○○, 63, *** *** ** *** *****************, Kim Dong-dong, ○○, 35***) stored in the tenant column, and stored in the tenant column ** * ‘B' stored in the tenant column ** * the lessor'.

On June 29, 2012, which was a private document on rights and obligations, in collusion with ○○○, A, and B, Defendant C forged one copy of the lease agreement in the name of Kim Il-Hy, Kim Il-young.

2. Determination

Defendant C introduced to Defendant C the same in this court or in the investigative agency as “A, who forged the lease agreement in the name of Kim B, along with himself/herself,” and Defendant C introduced to Defendant C. In light of the fact that Defendant C stated to the effect that “A stated to that effect,” or “A previously introduced several persons to loan these methods.” In light of the fact that Defendant C stated to the purport that “A was a part of the lease agreement in the name of Kim B and Kim B, there is no reason to deem that Defendant C was a part of the above provision in the name of B and A’s Kim B.

(1) However, at the time of the forgery of the lease agreement in the name of the Kim Il-young on July 2012, A was present as a witness in this court, and at the time of the forgery, B, ○○, and A, Defendant C did not have been employed.

Around September 2012, Defendant C provided a forged loan agreement to Defendant C because it was necessary to borrow money again after obtaining a loan using a forged lease agreement on the off-dong Incheon Nam-gu BYU, Incheon, which owned the largest right to BB, and accordingly, Defendant C provided a false loan. At the time of the forgery of the lease agreement, Defendant C provided a false loan agreement. At the time of the forgery of the lease agreement, Defendant C provided a false statement to the purport, and Defendant C provided a good offices to arrange a lender to receive a loan by using a forged lease agreement and resident registration certificate. ② Defendant C provided a false statement to Defendant C and this case, and Defendant C received a loan from Defendant C through the introduction of Defendant C. In full view of the fact that Defendant C and this was stated to the purport, Defendant C did not know the possibility of the existence of a false loan agreement only after Defendant C requested a false loan from the time of the forgery of the lease agreement.

Therefore, if we recognize this possibility, Defendant C did not participate at the time of forging B and A’s Kim B’s right to lease contract, and the conclusion that Defendant C took part in the loan from the time of attempted to borrow a forged lease contract is reached, and it seems difficult to exclude the possibility of such conclusion from the evidence submitted by the prosecution.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, it is difficult to view that Defendant C’s facts charged that did not participate in the above lease agreement in the name of Kim Il-chul, was proven to the extent that it could be excluded from a reasonable doubt. This part of the facts charged constitutes a case where there is no proof of a crime and thus, the judgment of innocence is rendered pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is so decided as per Disposition by publicly announcing the summary of

Judges Kim Jong-soo