The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The instant registration of the transfer of a motor vehicle was made with the consent of J, and the Defendant and J have the intent to make the instant motor vehicle a registration of the transfer of ownership. As such, the crime of re-registration of the instant motor vehicle by means of electronic records, etc. and the crime of gambling, such as electronic records, etc., is not established.

Although the court below found the defendant guilty of charges, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the re-violation of the official electronic records, etc., which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misapprehension of the legal doctrine, the crime of reproduction in the electronic records, etc. as prescribed by Article 228(1) of the Criminal Act is established when a public official makes a false report to a public official and makes a false report to record false facts in the electronic records. “False report” refers to a report to a fact contrary to the truth. “False report” refers to a statement to a non-existent fact against the objective truth, or an entry into a non-existent fact into a non-existent fact. Even if there is no or external existence of a description in the public electronic records, etc., if there is any defect that falls under the invalidation, the statement constitutes a false entry (see Supreme Court Decision 201Do14038, Dec. 13, 2012). According to Article 12(1) and (4) of the Automobile Management Act, a person who acquires a registered motor vehicle shall file an application for the registration of transfer of the ownership with the Mayor/Do Governor as prescribed by Presidential Decree, and if the transferee of the motor vehicle fails to file for the registration of transfer in lieu of the transferee.

The Defendant sold 1% of the shares of the instant vehicle to J.