The nature of the crime of causing damage to documents where the holder of a title deed who prepares a false written confirmation against his/her will is damaged (affirmative)

If a written confirmation is damaged against the owner's will, the written confirmation shall be prepared in the name of the defendant, and even if it contains false contents contrary to the truth, the defendant shall not be exempted from liability for the crime of destroying and damaging documents.

Article 366 of the Criminal Act

Defendant 1 and two others

Defendant 1, 2, and Prosecutor

Daejeon District Court Decision 81No1400 delivered on April 14, 1982

All appeals are dismissed.

1. Defendant 1’s grounds of appeal are examined.

As determined by the court below, if the original letter of confirmation is damaged by the defendant against the will of the owner of the leather, the certificate shall be prepared in the name of the defendant, and even if it contains false statements contrary to the truth, the defendant shall not be exempted from the liability for the crime of destroying documents. Therefore, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the crime of destroying documents, such as theory

2. Defendant 2's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the evidence of the court of first instance maintained by the court below, the fact of the judgment against the above defendant is legally recognized, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to perjury, such as a theory of lawsuit, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence in the judgment below. It is without merit.

3. Prosecutor's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the judgment of the court of first instance maintained by the court below, the court of first instance judged that the testimony of the defendants against the defendants 1 was false testimony against memory as stated in its holding as to the facts charged against the defendant 1, (b), C, C, C, and the facts charged against the defendant 1 as to the facts charged against the defendant 1, and thus, the court of first instance rendered a judgment of not guilty as to the facts charged against the defendants since there is no evidence that the defendants' testimony was false testimony against memory. The court of first instance affirmed this part of the facts charged against the defendants. The court of first instance is just in examining the process of cooking the evidence conducted by the court of first instance in taking such measures in light of the records,

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Jeong Tae-tae (Presiding Justice)