If the public official of a family register accepts the report knowing that the report is false, and enters it in the family register, the sex of the false public document preparation;

In a case where it is obvious that the reported matters are false, the family register is interpreted to mean that the entry may be refused, so if it is known that it is false, the crime of preparing false official documents is established.

Article 227 of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Seoul High Court Decision 76No1391 delivered on June 10, 1977

The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

If a report is made on the family register in charge of the recording on the family register in question, if the report satisfies at least the requirements in the form, the procedure of recording shall be followed, and it shall not be necessary to correct the acceptance after examining whether the report is true. However, the family register is a public book established in order to notarized the identity of the person and to let another person know the status of each person, and it is reasonable that it conforms to the legitimate and truth of the stated matters. Thus, if it is obvious that the reported matters are false, the family register shall be interpreted to be suitable for the legal spirit.

Therefore, when the family register is known that the reported matters are false, and the intention of the reporter is intentionally and entered in the family register, the crime of preparation of false official document under Article 227 of the Criminal Code shall be constituted.

In this regard, the judgment of the court below is just to take the so-called of the defendant into consideration under the above law, and there is no misapprehension of the legal principles, such as the theory of lawsuit. In addition, the record can be accepted in the original case, and it cannot be said that there was a violation of the rules of evidence or an error of mistake of facts, such as the theory of lawsuit, etc.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Jeong Tae-won (Presiding Justice)