Where a false public document and forged public document are used en bloc, relationship between the crime of uttering of false public document and the crime of uttering of forged public document

If an official document prepared by falsity and an official document prepared by forgery are held in a lump sum, the crime of uttering of false official document and the crime of uttering of forged official document shall be in a normal and competitive relationship.

Articles 37 and 40 of the Criminal Act

Defendant 1 and two others

Defendants

Cheongju District Court (73 Gohap53) in the first instance

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant 1 and 2 shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months and by imprisonment with prison labor for ten months.

75 days of detention days before the sentence of the original judgment shall be included in the original sentence.

However, the execution of the above punishment is suspended for one year for Defendant 1 and 2, and for two years for Defendant 3, respectively, from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The gist of the grounds for appeal by Defendant 1 is as follows: First, there is no criminal intent that the Defendant committed the principal offense; second, there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts affecting the judgment; second, the summary of the grounds for appeal by the defense counsel between Defendant 2 and Defendant 3 is that the amount of punishment sentenced by the court below is too unreasonable.

Therefore, the first ground for appeal by Defendant 1 is examined, and the evidence duly adopted by the court below after examining the evidence is examined in light of the records, and the criminal facts of the above defendant can be recognized. Thus, the grounds for appeal as to the mistake of facts cannot be accepted.

According to the provisions of Article 40 of the Criminal Act, in a case where a single act constitutes several crimes, the upper concurrent relationship is established and punishment for the most severe crime is punished. The Defendants held that they held a false receipt request and receipt note and a forged grade table. Although the crime of uttering of false public document and uttering of forged public document are in the upper concurrent relationship, the crimes of uttering of false public document are committed in the upper concurrent relationship, but there is an error of law in the misapprehension of the legal principles which are applied to both parties as substantive concurrent crimes, and thus, the necessity of judgment on the grounds of appeal of unfair sentencing by the Defendants is not to escape the reversal of the lower judgment.

Therefore, in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, the judgment of the court below is reversed and the members are decided again.

The summary of the facts charged and the evidence admitted by a party member are as shown in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below, and all of them are cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Article 27, Article 30 of the Criminal Act provides that the Defendants shall be sentenced to punishment for non-indicted 1-2 (A) of the judgment of the court below; Article 27, Article 30 of the Criminal Act provides that the Defendants shall be sentenced to punishment for each of the above crimes; Article 25, Article 30 of the so-called "public document" and Article 29, Article 227, and Article 30 of the same Act provides that the Defendants shall be sentenced to punishment for non-indicted 3; Article 25, Article 30 of the same Act provides that the Defendants shall be sentenced to punishment for each of the above crimes; Article 25, Article 30 of the same Act provides that the defendants shall be sentenced to punishment for non-indicted 5; Article 27 of the same Act provides that the defendants shall be sentenced to punishment for non-indicted 3; Article 30 of the same Act provides that the so-called "public document" and Article 27 of the same Act provides that the so-called "public document" shall be subject to punishment for non-indicted 5;

It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Kim Hong-san (Presiding Judge) Constitution of the Republic of Korea