logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2019.06.13 2018노1515
사문서변조등
Text

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant, a lessee of the instant store, was notified by the Tax AccountantF that “a lessee of the instant store shall obtain the lessor’s consent to newly prepare the lease contract or to add the details that he/she succeeds to the status of the lessee in the lease contract.” Therefore, the Defendant notified the lessor B (Seoul D) that he/she will additionally add his/her status to the lease contract, and did not obtain such consent.”

Therefore, the defendant had dolusent intention to modify the private document to state the succession to the lessee's status in the lease contract without the consent of B and D.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and acquitted.

2. On July 6, 2015, the Defendant, as a lessee who entered into a lease contract with the husband D with the Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and the first floor store (hereinafter “instant store”) which is the owner B, received a request from the lessor to “E” in the name of “E” as a result of consultation with the certified tax accountant F, a tax agent who was a tax agent agent of the Defendant, who was in mind a corporate entrepreneur in the instant store around December 2015, when the Defendant was carrying out the mobile phone wholesale retail trade in the instant store. As a result, it is possible to newly prepare and submit a lease contract entered into by the corporation as the lessee, to the tax office, or to submit an existing lease contract stating that “the status of the lessee as the corporation is succeeded” in the case where the lessee of the existing lease contract and the representative of the corporation are the same, so it is possible to request the lessor to confirm whether the lessor consents to the additional entry

However, the Defendant did not confirm whether the Defendant agreed to add the above contents in the lease contract to B and D, and responded to F without obtaining consent from F. F, and F around January 28, 2016 after completing the registration of incorporation into “Co. E”.

arrow