Whether replacing a photograph attached to a resident registration certificate constitutes the crime of forging an official document

The alteration of a photograph attached to another person's resident registration certificate into a defendant's photograph does not lead to the alteration of the identity of the resident registration certificate, and it is not a crime of forging public documents, but a crime of altering public documents.

Article 225 of the Criminal Act

Defendant 1 and two others

Prosecutor and Defendant

Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul District Court (80 High Gohap179)

Of the judgment of the court below, the part on Defendant 1 is reversed.

Defendant 1 shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

One hundred and fifty days of detention days prior to the pronouncement of the judgment of the court below shall be included in the original sentence.

The seized resident registration certificate (certificate No. 1) shall be destroyed and discarded.

All appeals by the Defendants, such as the Prosecutor’s appeal against Defendant 2 and 3, are dismissed.

The gist of the grounds for appeal against Defendant 2 and 3 by the public prosecutor is that the punishment against the same Defendants is unreasonable because the punishment against the same Defendants is uneasible, and the summary of the grounds for appeal by Defendant 1 does not commit this case in the first and the planned intention from the first time, but did not commit this case, and it comes to the crime of this case because it did not come back with a large amount of money, and thus, the court below's punishment is heavy. The summary of the grounds for appeal by Defendant 2 is that the same Defendant was tried to believe and help the same defendant to believe the situation of Defendant 1, and that the summary of the grounds for appeal by Defendant 2 is that the court below's punishment is heavy because the same Defendant was believed and heartd by the above Defendant, and thus, it seems that both of the court below's punishment is excessive, and it seems that there is a claim for mistake of facts.

According to the evidence at the time of the judgment of the court below, if facts constituting the same crime as the time of original judgment can be recognized, and in light of the overall circumstances that form the conditions for sentencing through records, it is reasonable for the court below to impose the sentence of 10 months on Defendant 2 and 3, but the sentencing of Defendant 1 for whom the court below sentenced Defendant 1 a year and six months is heavy, and it is reasonable to discuss Defendant 1’s appeal, and there is no reason to discuss Defendant 2 and 3’s appeal or prosecutor’s appeal.

On the other hand, the court below held that the non-indicted's photograph attached to the non-indicted 3's resident registration certificate is a forgery of a public document, but this does not lead to the alteration of the identity of the resident registration certificate. However, all the forgery or alteration of a public document is an offense falling under Article 225 of the Criminal Act and Article 229 of the same Act, and all the crimes of its exercise are not affected by the judgment. Thus, the judgment of the court below is not reversed for this reason.

Therefore, since the prosecutor's appeal against the defendant 2 and 3 or the appeal against the same defendant is without merit, it is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and since the appeal against the defendant 1 is with merit, the part of the judgment below against the same defendant is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the same Act and the judgment below is

The criminal facts and the summary of evidence against Defendant 1 admitted as a party member are the same as the time of the original judgment, except for the alteration of forgery from among the criminal facts at the time of the original judgment, and therefore, they are quoted in accordance with Article 369 of the same Act.

Articles 225 and 30 of the Criminal Act

Articles 229, 225, and 30 of the same Act

Article 347 (1) of the same Act (Selection of Imprisonment or Imprisonment)

The former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the same Act

Article 57 of the same Act

Article 48(3) and (1)2 of the Criminal Act

Judges Jeon Man-Ma (Presiding Judge)