beta
Text
1. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000;
2. Where the defendant does not pay a fine, 100,000 won.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
1. Forgery of private documents and the uttering of a falsified investigation document;
A. On February 2, 2015, the Defendant stated “a certificate of loan” in the “C” office in the Defendant’s operation of the Defendant located in Yangju-si, without authority, for the purpose of exercising the right, in the form of a “certificate of loan” on A4 paper, and then, on February 2, 2015, the date of loan will be changed from February 2, 2015 to July 2, 2015.
The borrower: AD (hereinafter omitted) and her husband: (a) stated, “EF (hereinafter omitted)”, affixed the E’s seal imprint in advance, which was possessed by the name of the said E, and submitted to G the above loan certificate in the same manner as it was actually prepared by G on the same day.
Accordingly, the Defendant forged and exercised a copy of the loan certificate in the name of E, a private document on rights, duties, and proof of facts.
B. On April 9, 2015, the Defendant: (a) at the office of a law firm I; and (b) at the office of a law firm I, the notary public, without authority, delegated all the authority that the said notary public entrusts the preparation of a fair deed of lending and borrowing of money in the name of the law firm I with a verification-type pen for the purpose of exercising the authority; (c) submitted the said letter of delegation to the law firm I, “J”, “E”, “E”, “E”, “E” in the debt column, “E and Seongbuk-gu”, and “E and Seongbuk-gu”, and signed the seal imprint of E, which was held in advance following the name of the said “E”, with the signature affixed by the said notary public, the said notary public, without authority, submitted the said letter of delegation to the attorney-at-law in charge of notarial acts.
Accordingly, the Defendant forged and exercised a letter of delegation in the name of E, a private document on rights, obligations, and proof of facts.
2. Although the Defendant did not borrow KRW 50,00 from J in fact at the date, time, and place specified in Paragraph 1(b) and at the place specified in Paragraph 1(b), the said notary public does not have to do so to the attorney-at-law in charge of notarial services, as Paragraph 1(b).