logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 울산지방법원 2019.01.11 2018고단2035
공전자기록등위작교사
Text

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Reasons

Criminal facts

On April 24, 2017, around 11:00, the Defendant reported an advertisement “a certificate of graduation and forgery of a school attendance certificate” on the Internet Blogs, and asked the name-disciant by e-mail to forge the Defendant’s “certificate of graduation of C University” in the name of president of C University. In response, the Defendant transferred KRW 200,000 to D E bank account at around 11:51 on the same day.

In this respect, the person whose name was unsatisfyed out one of the PDF files with C University graduate from C University on the same day, and then sent the PDF files with the Defendant’s e-mail at around 12:00 on the same day.

As a result, the Defendant instigated a person under whose name the name was in the name of C University president, who is an electronic record of a public office, to teach the management of academic affairs of C University and issuance of a certificate of graduation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant (to deny the purpose of causing excessive handling of affairs);

1. Details of e-mail sending, certificates of graduation forged, decision on correction of register, details of remittance, application of Acts and subordinate statutes and written opinions;

1. Article 227-2 and Article 31 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense;

1. Four months of imprisonment to be suspended;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 59(1) of the Criminal Code for sentencing under Article 59(1) of the suspended sentence was to conceal the identity problem of one's own gender to another in order to misrepresent the forged academic background, the fact that the defendant did not output or use a PDF file sent by him, the fact that the issue of rectification of gender was resolved completely after the instant case, and thus, the possibility of re-offending is no longer determined, the defendant is disputing the purpose of correcting administrative affairs, but all facts are being recognized, and there is no criminal history against the defendant.

arrow