(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.11.09 2017노2185 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.11.09 2017노2185

사문서위조등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

The Defendant, who misleads the gist of the grounds for appeal, was only granted a delivery of each of the documents stated in the facts charged in the instant case by C, and there was no forgery or use of each document.

The punishment sentenced by the court below (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake, the Defendant borrowed KRW 5 million from C, F’s receipt (Evidence No. 12, hereinafter “Evidence No. 1”) stating that “The Defendant repaid KRW 16 million to F on April 10, 2015,” and “the Defendant borrowed KRW 5 million from C (E).”

The above borrowed amount of KRW 5 million is 3 million in total with the previous borrowed amount of KRW 2 million and the new borrowed amount of KRW 3 million on the gold day, respectively. C, E’s written contract (Evidence 11 of the evidence record; hereinafter “the contract of this case”) and C’s receipt (Evidence 2 of the evidence record 10,000 won and KRW 20,000 in full payment to C on January 6, 2015; hereinafter “the second receipt of this case”) with the content that “the defendant paid the previous borrowed amount of KRW 20,000,000,000,0000,000 won and KRW 2,0000,0000,0000,0000,000 won and KRW 2,000,000,000,000,000) are forged, and the defendant’s assertion of mistake is without merit.

C consistently from the police to the court of the court below, there was no fact that the Defendant has consistently prepared the receipts of the instant case Nos. 1 and 2 and the instant contract (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant documents”).

On November 10, 2004, the Defendant made a statement to the effect that “The Defendant, at his own discretion, made each of the documents of this case using his signature and seal on the loan certificate (Evidence No. 1, No. 234 of the evidence record No. 234, hereinafter “the loan certificate of this case”).”

The name, signature, and seal of C stated in each of the instant documents (Provided, That the instant contract shall be in accordance with C.

유사 판례

-부산지방법원 2017.09.01 2017노1274

-인천지방법원 2017.02.08 2016노3622

-대구고등법원 2017.01.19 2016노566

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.12.14 2017노891

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.06.15 2017노155