beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. In determining the facts, the Defendant asserts that there was an error in the judgment of the court below that the Defendant, although there was no delivery of a forged promissory note to V on March 6, 2013, the part of the exercise of the forged securities was erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.
B. The Defendant asserts that the sentence imposed by the lower court (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. Determination
A. On February 6, 2008, the Defendant, at the office of the P company located in Kimhae-si, the Bank of Korea does not have any column for the amount of the promissory note in the second complex located in the branch office located in the Bank of Korea at the end of Kimhae-si, and instead, forged a promissory note in the name of the representative director U of the said Twit-si, a securities company, using a local reproduction machine, and subsequently, around March 6, 2013, the Defendant used the forged promissory note in the name of the representative director U of the said Twit-si, Kim Jong-si, Seoul-si, which is the securities, and exercised the forged securities by delivering a forged promissory note in possession to V, as described in the table No. 1 of the crime day list No. 5.2).
3) Considering the difference between the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating the credibility of a witness’s statement in light of the spirit of the principle of substantial direct examination adopted by the relevant legal principles, the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the witness statement made by the first instance court is clearly erroneous in light of the contents of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined by the first instance court, or the first instance court’s determination on the credibility of the witness statement made by the first instance court is remarkably unfair in full view of the results of the first instance court’s examination and the evidence duly examined by the time of closing argument in the appellate court.