The meaning of a crime in the crime of invalidation of a public document

The criminal intent in the crime of invalidation of public documents stipulated in Article 141(1) of the Criminal Act is the fact that the defendant is a document used by a public office, and the document prepared by the police is a document not used by a public office, and it does not constitute a document used by a public office on the ground that the document prepared by the police is a document not in completion, nor does it interfere with the perception that the existence of a public contest relationship between the defendant and the police officer or the existence of a defendant's exercise of force would impair the utility of the document.

Article 141(1) of the Criminal Act

Defendant

Military prosecutor;

Attorney Lee Jin-woo

The Army, High Military Court Decision 86Na167 delivered on September 22, 1986

The judgment below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Army, High School, and Military Court.

As to the Prosecutor’s Grounds of Appeal:

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below, based on the adopted evidence, found the defendant's serious cause of death and injury sustained serious injury on the truck drivened by the private watch keeping around 14:00 on March 13, 1985. The defendant stated the contents of the traffic accident to the Namyang Police Station in charge of traffic accident, and made a written statement that the defendant's name was unsatisfed (whether punishment is imposed against the victim, negligence of the victim, agreement, etc.). Since it was erroneous that the defendant's superior, Jung Young-young Kim as a soldier's status and made a statement about the traffic accident to the police officer, the defendant ordered the defendant to find the documents. At around 10:00 on March 15, 1985, the defendant returned the above documents and requested the return of the documents to the defendant, and it is difficult to view the defendant's use of the documents as a public official in charge of the above investigation and loss of the documents, and it is also difficult to acknowledge the facts that the defendant lost the documents and loss of the documents.

The criminal intent in the crime of invalidation of public documents stipulated in Article 141(1) of the Criminal Act is satisfied since the defendant was aware of the fact that it was used by public offices, and that it was damaged or concealed, or harmful to its utility by other means. The written statement prepared by the police does not constitute a document used by a public office, nor does it interfere with the perception that there is a public conspiracy between the defendant and Kim Jong-soo, or whether or not the defendant has exercised force on the part of the defendant interfered with the effectiveness of the documents. The defendant is the defendant who was investigated by the police at the court of first instance and made a statement disadvantageous to the victim, and the document was written promptly after being examined by the police at the court of first instance, with the intention of not first informing the police officer of the document, and was made in order to keep the document, and was made in order to have it continued, and therefore, the defendant did not have any influence on the conclusion of the judgment, despite the fact that the court below did not have any error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the elements of the crime.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Appellate Body. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Jong-chul (Presiding Justice)