Defendant

Kim Yong-ju

Law Firm TelviS, Attorneys Choi Won-ro

1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year;

2. 84 days under confinement prior to the pronouncement of this judgment shall be included in the above sentence;

3. One copy (No. 2) of an alien registration certificate seized shall be confiscated from the defendant, and the visa portion out of one copy (No. 1) of the seized Chinese passport shall be discarded;

4. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the facts charged as follows are as follows: (a) the use of a private document and the use of a private document around April 28, 2005; and (b) the use of a private document around May 24, 2005, are acquitted.

On May 7, 2004, the Defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of forging official documents in his name at the Seoul Southern District Court on May 15, 2004, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on May 15, 2004. On January 9, 2008, the Incheon District Court sentenced the Defendant to one year of suspension of execution for four months of imprisonment with prison labor for forging private documents in his name, etc. and became final and conclusive on January 17, 2008. However, on October 200, the Defendant was unable to re-entry into the Republic of Korea due to his personal information for which he was forced to depart from the Republic of Korea on May 28, 2004.

1. Obstruction of the performance of official duties by fraudulent means around May 20, 2005

On May 20, 2004, the Defendant submitted an application for the issuance of a family name and visa issued by the Korean consular official of the Republic of Korea in the Republic of Korea on April 28, 2005 without being opened through a normal opening procedure, and received a visa in the name of “(English name omitted)” from the Korean consular official of the Republic of Korea on May 20, 2005, as if the application was issued through a normal opening procedure.

The defendant, through fraudulent means, has obstructed the execution of duties concerning visa issuance affairs by public officials serving in the Korean consulate of the Republic of Korea.

2. Obstruction of the performance of official duties by fraudulent means around May 26, 2005.

On May 24, 2005, the Defendant: (a) prepared on May 24, 2005, an application for registration filed by a foreigner under the name of "(English name omitted) (gold name omitted)" (gold name omitted) at the Seoul Immigration Office (hereinafter referred to as "gold name") that was opened through a normal name procedure; and (b) submitted a foreign registration under the name of (English name omitted) (gold name omitted) at the Seoul Immigration Office (hereinafter referred to as "gold name") at the Seoul Immigration Office on May 26, 2005.

The defendant, through fraudulent means, obstructed the performance of duties concerning the foreigner registration of public officials working at the Seoul Immigration Office.

1. Statement corresponding thereto in this court by the defendant;

1. Statement corresponding thereto in this Court by Non-Indicted 1 of the witness

1. Each statement corresponding to each protocol of interrogation of the accused and Nonindicted Party 1 prepared by the prosecutor;

1. A statement to the effect that one copy of a Chinese passport and one foreign registration certificate have been seized from the defendant among the records of seizure prepared by the judicial police assistant;

1. Each statement corresponding thereto, among the requests for cooperation in investigation (verification of whether the head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office has committed any offense) in preparation of the head of the Seoul Central District Prosecutors' Office, and the investigation report prepared by the chief of the Seoul Central Prosecutors' Office;

1. Each statement corresponding to the investigation report prepared by the judicial police assistant (related to the fingerprints of the accused, securing an application for visa, and sending a copy of the application for foreigner registration);

1. A copy of the passport in the name of Kim○ and a description corresponding thereto in an alien registration certificate;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Each foreigner's criminal history records of the defendant and Kim ○○, inquiry into data, and investigation reports (reports attached to the judgment of the same kind of case);

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Article 137 (Selection of Imprisonment with Labor for Each Criminal Act)

2. Handling concurrent crimes;

The latter part of Article 37 and the first sentence of Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act

3. Aggravation for concurrent crimes; and

The former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (Aggravation of concurrent crimes with punishment stipulated in the crime of obstruction of the performance of fraudulent means around May 24, 2005, with heavier penalty)

4. Inclusion of days of detention in detention;

Article 57 of the Criminal Act

5. Confiscation;

Article 48 (1) 1 of the Criminal Act

6. Scrapping.

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

On May 7, 2004, the Defendant, under the name of the Defendant, was sentenced to a suspended sentence of two years for a year due to the crime of forging public documents, etc., and was forced to enter Korea again, based on the following: (a) the Defendant committed such crime to re-enter Korea; (b) and (c) the Defendant repeatedly committed similar crimes, such as the fact that he was sentenced to a suspended sentence of one year due to the crime of forging private documents, etc., even after entering Korea; and (d) the Defendant

1. Summary of the facts charged

On October 200, the Defendant, while entering and staying in the Republic of Korea on May 28, 2004, was unable to re-entry his personal information into the Republic of Korea on the grounds of forced departure from Korea on May 28, 2004, and the Defendant attempted to enter the Republic of Korea by forging the family register in the name of "Ma○○".

(a) the display of a falsified survey document on April 28, 2005;

In around 2004, the Defendant offered 5,00 China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic of China's Republic

On April 28, 2005, the Defendant, in the name column of the application form for visa issuance, issued a marriage visa at the Korean consul of the Republic of Korea in China, and submitted the application form for visa issuance to the above consular official who is unaware of the fact that the application form for visa issuance was duly completed. The Defendant submitted it to the above consular official name omitted, as the application form for visa issuance was duly completed.

The Defendant, who forged, exercised an application form for issuance of a visa, which is a private document on the rights and obligations in the name of Kim○-○, and a private document, which is a private document on the certification of facts in the name of the State of Public Security at the time of forged paths.

(b) the fabrication of private documents and the uttering of falsified private documents around May 24, 2005;

1) On May 24, 2005, the Defendant entered the name column of the application form for foreigner registration in the name of “(in English name omitted)” and “date of birth” in the name column of the application form for foreigner registration, without authority, for the purpose of exercising the application for alien registration by the Yangcheon-gu Seoul, Yangcheon-gu, Seoul, 6, 319-2 Seoul Immigration Office.

The Defendant forged a written application for alien registration, which is a private document on the rights and obligations of the Kim○-○ name.

2) The Defendant submitted a forged application for alien registration at the same time and place to an employee under the name of the Seoul Immigration Office who is unaware of the fact that the application was duly formed.

The Defendant exercised one copy of a forged foreigner registration application.

2. Determination

According to each of the evidence mentioned above and each of the statements of certification (Evidence No. 1) submitted by the defense counsel, the defendant applied for the change of the name and the date of birth from October 10, 1961 to Kim○○ (OOO October 10, 1965). If a name is opened by normal procedure, the previous name shall be entered in the heading unit. The heading unit of Kim○'s heading unit of Kim○ is not mentioned in the previous name, but it is not easy for the defendant to change the date of birth to reach the age above the age of 2, the date of birth itself has been changed to October 10, 1965. The fact that the date of birth has been recorded in the roadside Public Security Office from October 10, 196 is erroneous.

In light of these circumstances, although there is a possibility that the defendant would not normally change the name and date of birth upon the defendant's application, it is difficult to view that the defendant forged the defendant's family register in this circumstance, and on the basis of such family register, the defendant prepared and exercised the application form for issuance of visa or foreigner registration application under the belief that he/she was changed to Kim○○ (OOOOOO on October 1961). Thus, it is difficult to view such act of the defendant as constituting the forgery of private documents or the uttering of the above investigation documents, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it otherwise.

3. Conclusion

If so, among the facts charged in the instant case, the fact that the private document was stolen, the fact that the private document was held around April 28, 2005, the fact that the private document was held around May 24, 2005, and the fact that the private document was held on around May 24, 2005 constitutes a case where there is no proof of crime, and thus, the

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Cho Han-chul