beta
Main Issues
Whether or not a certificate of personal seal impression becomes an object of larceny
Summary of Judgment
A certificate of personal seal impression is an object of larceny.
[Reference Provisions]
Article 329 of the Criminal Act
Escopics
Defendant
upper and high-ranking persons
Defendant and Prosecutor
Defense Counsel
Attorney Park Jong-sub
Judgment of the lower court
Seoul Criminal Court Decision 85No466 delivered on April 23, 1985
Text
All appeals are dismissed.
Reasons
1. We examine the grounds of appeal by the defense counsel.
Examining the trial evidence of the first instance court cited by the court below in light of the records, each criminal facts of the judgment against the defendant are sufficiently recognized, and all the documents of the judgment, such as a certificate of personal seal impression, are objects of larceny. Therefore, the judgment below cannot be deemed to have erred by violating the rules of evidence or without evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit, and there is no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to property in larceny or in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to property in larceny. All the arguments are groundless.
2. We examine the Prosecutor’s grounds of appeal.
The court below affirmed the judgment of the court of first instance on the ground that it is difficult to view that the defendant had the intent to acquire the above money from the same person with the appraisal cost because the court of first instance decided that the defendant had the intent to acquire the above money, and that there is no intention to obtain the above money, and that the defendant's statement in the court of first instance and the police, some statements in the prosecutor's office and the police's office and the prosecutor's office's office and the prosecutor's office's office's and the prosecutor's office's statement in the second instance and the prosecutor's office's office's statement in the second instance and the prosecutor's office's office's and the prosecutor's office's office's statement in the second instance and the prosecutor's office's office's statement in the second instance and the prosecutor's office's statement in the second instance are not reliable, and that the court below's judgment contains no errors in the rules of evidence and there are no errors in the rules of evidence.
3. The appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is all dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
Justices Lee Jae-hee (Presiding Justice)