beta
Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. According to the statement of the gist of the grounds for appeal D, W, etc., the Defendant may, without the consent of D, recognize the fact that the Defendant, without the consent of D, included the land owned by the Defendant in the dominant station of Incheon-gun P&, thereby forging the power of attorney in F and G name
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misapprehending the facts and affecting the judgment.
2. Determination
A. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the victim D, who was an agent for the sale of a housing complex for electric source and 18 lots of land, which was purchased by the victim D in F and G from E; (b) the victim and E, in order to guarantee the right to passage over the land of E, the victim and E agreed to set a regional right for E-owned L, M, N, andO land as a dominant estate; and (c) the victim and E agreed to set a regional right for E-owned L, M, N, andO land as a dominant estate; and (d) the victim was delegated by E to perform the work related to the creation of a regional area,
(1) On March 22, 2011, the Defendant forged private documents: (a) at the upper corner of the Jindo-gun, Incheon, where F, G’s seal is affixed, the “real estate indication column” and the “person responsible” are blanks; and (b) the purport of delegation of the application for and withdrawal of the registration of the establishment of easements is to obtain a printed proxy form and to delegate the affairs related to the establishment of easements; (c) after being delegated with the affairs related to the establishment of easements, the Defendant obtained a delegation of the printed proxy form; and (d) after having the staff R of the Qa certified judicial scrivener office having knowledge of the fact that the land owned by the Defendant is not included in the dominant land, the
4. The Ministry of Strategy and Finance stated “F, Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City S building 908, G, and Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City T” as “F, Bupyeong-gu Incheon Metropolitan City S building 908, Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.”
Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a letter of delegation in F and G name, which is a private document related to rights and obligations.
The defendant of the Sheet Investigation Document shall be the Incheon District Court around May 9, 201.