logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2013.06.04 2013고단398
사문서위조등
Text

1. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months;

2. Provided, That the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date when this judgment has become final and conclusive;

3...

Reasons

Punishment of the crime

1. On December 28, 2011, the Defendant forged private documents without authority to exercise the claim for unjust enrichment of KRW 160,000,00,00 from the third party to H from the restaurant, Cho E, F, and G located near the D Station located in Yongsan-gu Seoul, Yongsan-gu, Seoul, for the purpose of exercising the claim for unjust enrichment of KRW 160,00,00,00,00, under the title of the “claim Transfer Agreement”, the Defendant, as the heir or substitute heir of the deceased I (Death May 22, 2011) according to the respective inheritance shares, shall transfer the claim to the assignee, and the transferee shall enter the content and take over the claim in the transferor’s column “3. E, Ansan-gu, 103-1504, 1503-1504, 1504,” without authority.

4.F and Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government L Building B-401,

5. The name “G and Gyeyang-gu Incheon M building 6-303” was written on a computer, and three seals, such as the above E, F, and G, which were inscribed in advance on the name side of the above E, F, and G were affixed, and forged one copy of the “claim Transfer Agreement”, which is a private document related to rights and obligations.

2. On January 26, 2012, the Defendant filed a lawsuit for the claim for the transfer of money at the public service center of the Seoul Central District Court located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Seocho-dong, Seocho-gu, Seoul, and exercised the above investigation document by delivering a copy of the transfer contract in the name of the E, etc. that forged the above, to the public official in charge who is unaware of the fact that the transfer contract in the name of the E, etc. was duly formed.

3. 사기미수 피고인은 2012. 1. 26.경 서울중앙지방법원 민원실에서, 위와 같이 위조한 계약서를 제출하면서 H을 상대로 ‘고발인과 피고인의 亡父 I가 매매한 건물대금 1억 6,000만원 중 피고인이 E 외 6인으로부터 그 상속분을 양수한 금액 및 피고인 본인의 상속분의 합 51,764,702원을 피고인에게 지급하라’는 취지의 양수금 등 청구의 소를 제기하여 위 금원을 편취하려 하였으나, 2012. 6. 19. 패소판결을...

arrow