A. Whether there is part of an official document even if there is no blanker drawing attached to the official document (affirmative)

(b) In cases where there are errors in the drawings attached to an official document and are replaced at will with the corrected drawings, alteration of the official document and criminal intent of the event;

A. It cannot be deemed that the drawings are not part of the official document solely on the ground that the drawings attached to the official document have not affixed the seal.

B. Even if there are parts erroneously indicated in the original drawing attached to an application for authorization of a land substitution plan which was prepared in the name of the market and sent to the Do Governor, it is sufficient to recognize the criminal intent of the above act of a public official in charge of urban planning affairs arbitrarily changing the above drawing from the corrected drawing without going through legitimate procedures, and the alteration of official document and the criminal intent of the above event shall not be denied because the approval of the market is expected regardless of the drawing’s absence.

Article 225 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Lee Young-su, Kim Tae-tae

Seoul High Court Decision 84No2962 delivered on February 1, 1985

The appeal is dismissed.

1. Defendant’s defense counsel’s first ground of appeal

There is no reason to argue that the drawing is not a part of the official document solely on the ground that the drawing attached to the official document was not affixed a seal, and that there is no error of incomplete deliberation or lack of reason in the judgment of the court below in the opposite position.

2. Ground of appeal No. 2

According to the records, the defendant found that the road location of the drawing attached to the application for authorization for a land readjustment project (pre-designated land substitution plan) under the name of the government city in the name of the government city in the name of the government city sent by the government city to the Gyeonggi-do Governor, and that the drawing has been changed to another drawing like the original adjudication. Even if the road location of the drawing attached to the above application for authorization is erroneously indicated as the defendant's assertion, it is nothing more than that of the public document because the drawing is part of the public document because the cadastral article, etc. did not inspect whether it is correct, as alleged in the theory of the lawsuit, it cannot be deemed that there was an empty document because there was an article of the cadastral map, etc., which did not discover the error, and therefore, it is not an appropriate precedent in the judgment of the court below, and there is no reason to hold that there was an error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the drawing of a public official or a public

3. The ground of appeal No. 3

As seen above, even though there is a part of the original drawings attached to the application for authorization of land substitution plan which was prepared in the name of the government market and sent to the Governor of the Gyeonggi-do, it is sufficient to recognize the criminal intent for the act of arbitrarily changing the above drawings from the corrected drawings without going through legitimate procedures by the defendant in charge of urban planning affairs in the city of the government, and it is sufficient to recognize the criminal intent for the same event, and it is not possible to deny the criminal intent on the ground that there is a reason such as the modification of the official document and the expectation of the market's consent regardless of the drawings such as the novels, etc.

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

Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)