beta
Text
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) ① The shares (1,00 shares) held by F in the process of establishing E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) are all the shares trusted by F in the name of F. ② According to the agreement of F and the Defendant on June 13, 2008 between F and the Defendant, F did not participate in the E’s entire business and external business, and the capital increase by F in order to resolve the accumulated deficit, which constitutes “the business that F does not participate in the said agreement,” and F comprehensively delegated the authority of shareholders and directors as to the preparation of the documents of this case prepared in the course of capital increase.
It is reasonable to see, and 3 even if not, if F knew of the preparation of the instant documents, it is presumed that F would have accepted it as a matter of course.
Therefore, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty on the facts charged of this case as not guilty is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.
2. Determination
A. Considering the difference between the spirit of substantial direct psychological principle and the first instance court and the appellate court’s method of evaluating credibility, the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the first instance court was clearly erroneous in light of the content of the first instance judgment and the evidence duly examined in the first instance court.
Except in exceptional cases where it is deemed significantly unfair to maintain the first instance judgment on the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the first instance trial, or in full view of the results of the first instance examination and the results of the further examination of evidence conducted up to the closing of the appellate trial, the appellate court shall make a first instance judgment on the sole basis that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance trial is different from the appellate court’s judgment.