logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 동부지원 2013.07.23 2013고단451
사기등
Text

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of two million won.

If the defendant fails to pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

On May 10, 2012, the defendant was sentenced to two years of imprisonment with prison labor for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) in Busan High Court on May 10, 2012.

Around October 14, 2010, the Defendant stated that “E shall delegate a lawsuit to D” to D, and “E shall read “E” as “E” in the address column, and “E” and “E” in the name column, without having requested the Defendant to, or granted the power to, delegate a lawsuit to D with respect to, attorney-at-law, the request for transfer of ownership between the applicant F and E, and the respondent, and then forged one copy of the letter of delegation of the lawsuit, which is a private document for the rights and obligations of E, by sealing E on the next page.

Summary of Evidence

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. For reporting criminal investigations (general), and for reporting seal imprints;

1. Proxy of a lawsuit;

1. Previouss: Criminal records, investigation reports (a copy of the judgment and reports attached thereto, respectively, to the current status of personal identification), and the application of Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 231 of the Criminal Act concerning facts constituting an offense and Article 231 of the Selection of Punishment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. The portion not guilty of Articles 70 and 69(2) of the Criminal Act for the detention in a workhouse;

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the summary of the uttering of a falsified investigation document is that the Defendant presented it to D, who is aware of the forgery of the falsified litigation at the time and place stated in the facts charged.

However, according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this court, the defendant as the actual operator of H, the above company, from around 2003 to around 2003, was performing the construction of the J building with the size of the first floor and the 20th floor above the ground (hereinafter the above building "the building of this case"), and the registration of preservation of ownership of the above building around 207.

arrow