The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

1. Around December 28, 2010, the Defendant in collusion with C on the charge of the facts charged, at the Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office of Family Register on the same day and at the same place, prepared a marriage report as if there was a normal intention of marriage between D and Vietnam female E, and submitted the report to the public official in charge of false name, who is unaware of the fact, submitted the report to enter the above D and E into the family register information system, which is a public electronic record, and had the public official enter the false facts into the above D and E, and exercised it by having the said public official keep the computerized data of D’s family register as above.

2. The defendant's assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion is that the Defendant only prepared and received documents related to disguised marriage in accordance with the direction of C, which operated an international marriage broker, without knowing the fact that D and E are disguised marriage, and did not intend to jointly process them.

B. A joint principal offender under Article 30 of the relevant legal doctrine commits a crime jointly by two or more persons. In order to establish a joint principal offender, a joint principal offender is required to commit a crime through a functional control by a joint doctor, which is a subjective element, with the intention of joint processing and an objective requirement. A joint principal offender’s intent is to jointly engage in a specific criminal act with the intent of a joint principal, and to shift his/her own intent by using another person’s act. Such joint principal offender’s intent is insufficient to accept the other person’s criminal act without the awareness of the other person’s criminal act. However, it is not necessary to accept prior conspiracy of a joint principal offender’s plan to commit a crime, and there is a trade name that the accomplice’s act constitutes a constituent element or shares the act in essence related to the elements of a joint principal offender.

I would like to say.

And the intent of such a co-processing.