The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On November 24, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of forging private documents at the Gwangju District Court on August 24, 2015, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 7, 2015.

The Defendant resided in the Southern-gun C Village and has been in the jurisdiction of the village head since 2007, and the Korea Road Corporation was in the construction of access roads to the above C Village among the sections of the Highway Corporation (D).

is a company.

A. On June 3, 2010, the Defendant submitted to the Korea Road Corporation a written petition regarding the access road construction project, with intent to arbitrarily prepare a written consent as if he/she obtained the consent of the majority of village residents.

The defendant stated 17 residents' addresses, positions, and names in the remarks column of the letter of consent to be attached to the above petition in the non-permanent area.

However, from among the above residents, E, F, G, and H4 had never delegated the defendant with the authority to prepare the above petition.

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising, the Defendant forged a letter of consent on the rights and obligations of the above four persons.

B. On June 2010, the Defendant submitted a forged written consent, as described in paragraph (a), to the person in charge of the construction project in Korea, as if it were a document duly formed.

2. Determination

A. The crime of forging a private document is established when the form and appearance to the extent that it can be seen as a document prepared by the nominal owner is sufficient to enter the document in the real private document prepared by the nominal owner. Thus, it does not necessarily require the signature or seal of the nominal owner. However, whether it is sufficient for the general public to enter the document in the real private document prepared by the nominal owner should be determined by comprehensively taking account of the form and appearance of the document, as well as various circumstances such as the process of the preparation of the document, type, content, and the function of the document in the transaction (see Supreme Court Decision 95Do221, Dec. 26, 1997; Supreme Court Decision 95Do221, Dec.