beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant was a child of B who died on July 18, 201.
A. As the Defendant borrowed 200 million won from C to demand the Defendant to offer security, the Defendant offered D apartment units 103 1303 Dong-gu, Changwon-gu, Changwon-si, his father as collateral. For this purpose, the Defendant was willing to forge a power of attorney to obtain the certificate of seal imprint in B’s name to obtain the certificate of seal imprint in B’s name.
On July 4, 2011, the Defendant entered “B”, “B”, “Submission of Company”, “A”, and “B” and “B” in the column of the delegated person of the power for application for certification of seal imprint in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungyang-gu, Sungdong Office 9, Seongbuk-gu, Sungyang-gu, Seoul, Seoul, in the letter of delegation for application for certification of seal imprint, “B”, “B”, and “A” and “B” respectively, and affixed the seal imprint of B voluntarily created adjacent to B’s name.
For the purpose of exercising, the Defendant forged a letter of delegation in B, a private document related to rights and obligations.
B. The Defendant, at the time and place specified in the preceding paragraph, delivered the forged power of representation to a public official who was unaware of the forgery at the same time and place, as if it were a document duly formed.
2. The facts charged in this case should be based on the premise that the defendant was not allowed B at the time of preparing the power of attorney in B.
According to the records, the issue was whether the right to request the transfer of ownership of apartment in the name of "B" was invalid by using a power of attorney, etc. forged in the name of "B", which was forged in the Changwon District Court (Supreme Court Decision 2014Na20595 Decided April 23, 2015, the Changwon District Court Decision 2013No. 1501 Decided February 20, 2014). The issue was whether the right to request the transfer of ownership of apartment in the name of "B" becomes invalid by the above lawsuit. The relevant court can recognize the fact that the law firm confirmed and accepted B as the person liable for the registration as at the time of the lawsuit, while the defendant did so without the consent of B.