beta
Text
The judgment below
Among the guilty parts, the preparation of false official documents due to the false preparation of the purchase contract of April 7, 2008.
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, Defendant 1 did not accept KRW 3 million in cash from N as a bribe, and received KRW 1 disease from N as a bribe, but this merely constitutes a formal gift, and thus, it does not constitute a bribe. Since N is in dispute at the time when AR was known and is in interest with N, there is a possibility that the Defendant made a false statement that is disadvantageous to the Defendant. The lower court found Defendant guilty of this part of the charges based on the above evidence, and there is an error of misapprehending of legal principles or misapprehending of legal principles.
B) In light of the fact that the Defendant signed the AJ lease agreement to the effect that the part concerning the forgery of a private document and the display of a forged document is leased at the time of aware of AR, the Defendant may be deemed to have been entrusted with the preparation of an application for N’s AA project participation in the name or obtained ex post approval from N, and thus, the Defendant does not commit a crime of forging a private document or uttering of a falsified private document.
2) The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (the amount of eight months of imprisonment, additional collection 4.29 million won) is too unreasonable. (B) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecution including the prosecutor’s statement at X-type prosecutor’s office and the fact that the testimony at the lower court’s court’s court court’s court’s court’s testimony is not reliable and that the Defendant does not seem to have paid the flight fare after accurately checking X the share of the flight fare, etc., and there is sufficient evidence to prove that the Defendant received the bribe by causing the payment of the flight fare on behalf of the flight aircraft, but the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged.
2. The occupation of preparing each false official document and holding each false official document.