logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.02.07 2013노4390
변호사법위반
Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as the chief secretary of the F judicial scrivener office, committed an act of creating and submitting relevant documents requested by the clients concerning individual rehabilitation applications and individual bankruptcy immunity cases, and did not act as an agent for non-contentious cases as stated in the facts charged in the instant case.

B. The defendant is merely an employee under the direction of a certified judicial scrivener, and the preparation of documents, etc. which are submitted to the court as a certified judicial scrivener under the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act and the submission of documents, etc. are prescribed by the Certified Judicial Scriveners Act, and most of the cases are handled at the certified judicial scrivener office. Thus, the defendant misleads the defendant as not constituting a violation of the Attorney-at-Law Act. There

C. Facts of the collection portion and money and valuables, such as commission fees, etc. obtained by the instant case, were reverted to a certified judicial scrivener F, and the Defendant did not have acquired profits from the instant crime.

Therefore, the lower court that sentenced the Defendant to collect the penalty is unlawful.

The punishment of the judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (Truth, 10 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution, 374, 787, 995) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) In light of the purport of Article 109 subparagraph 1 of the Attorney-at-Law Act regarding a mistake of facts, the term "agent" under the above Article 109 subparagraph 1 of the same Act includes not only the legal representative dealing with a legal case under the name of his/her agent, but also the case where he/she intends to use legal knowledge on behalf of his/her behalf, or to generate the same effect as the case where he/she actually performs a legal representative without the form of his/her own act because he/she actually takes the lead of the handling of a case on behalf of his/her own with no legal knowledge or for the deficient principal, and only the external form of the case

arrow