In the case of preparation under the implied consent of the name of the document holder, the nature of the forgery and uttering of the private document (negative)

The non-party (B) and (B) who is a director of the company A submitted a letter of resignation to the representative director, but the representative director is a director in charge of the affairs who did not make the registration of the director's resignation, and the defendant's act of writing the letter of resignation with his seal can be deemed to have been done with his implied consent. Thus, the crime of forgery and uttering is not established.

Articles 231 and 234 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Prosecutor

Seoul Criminal Court Decision 82No4766 delivered on December 10, 1982

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment of the court below, on its reasoning, submitted a letter of resignation to the non-indicted Nam, who is the representative director, the resignation of the director to the director of the Namdong Electric Co., Ltd., and the representative director failed to make the registration of the above director's resignation, which led to the defendant, who is the director in charge of the above company, strongly demanded the registration of the director's resignation, so the defendant prepared the letter of resignation with his seal affixed by the defendant. In comparison with the records, the defendant is justified in the measures and there is no violation of law such as the theory of fact-finding in the process of fact-finding. Thus, the preparation of the above letter of resignation by the defendant can be deemed as having been made under the implied consent of the above person at least. Thus, there is no objection and the letter of resignation, and it cannot be deemed that the defendant made the registration of resignation by this letter of resignation and made the false entry in the notarial deed register without proof of the crime, and therefore the decision of the court below which acquitted the defendant cannot be adopted.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Jeon Soo-hee (Presiding Justice)