logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2020.11.12 2019노1950
사문서위조등
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error and inappropriate sentencing)

A. The premium receipt of this case was prepared in a genuine manner with the consent of D and E, one of the children of D, not a forged document.

(M) 2.2

Even if the defendant's act is found guilty, the sentencing of the court below (the fine of five million won) is too unreasonable.

(F) Determination; 2. Determination

A. In full view of the following additional circumstances recognized by the court below and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, it can be recognized that the defendant forged and exercised the receipt of premium in the name E as stated in the facts constituting the crime of the court below.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

1) Around April 20, 2013, the Defendant entered into a franchise agreement with D on a set of KRW 30 million, monthly rent of KRW 2.8 million, franchise fee of KRW 15 million, and facility premium of KRW 70 million (hereinafter “instant agreement”) with respect to the chain store where the Defendant was in operation between D and D (hereinafter “instant contract”).

2) The premium receipt (hereinafter “the premium receipt of this case”) in the same contents as the lease contract and franchise agreement was made and written in the name of E, which is the child of D. D.

2) Around October 2016, the Plaintiff paid KRW 50,000,000 to the Defendant on five occasions under the instant contract until August 2016, and paid KRW 280,000 per month on the basis of monthly rent after concluding a contract. However, the Defendant omitted the monthly rent received from D when filing a report on income at the tax office, and such fact was found to be subject to the imposition of taxes on the monthly rent and additional charges, etc. on the income equivalent to the monthly rent, which was omitted due to being discovered in the Seo-gu Daejeon Tax Office around October 2016.

arrow