beta
Text
The defendant shall be innocent.
Reasons
1. Facts charged;
A. Around December 2015, the Defendant forged a private document: (a) on a restaurant where the trade name in Yong-gun C is unknown, the Defendant entered the name, resident registration number, and address of E in column “a person who confirmed”, as the title “a fact confirmation document in blank,” in order to use it as evidence for a lawsuit seeking cancellation of ownership transfer registration in the area of 1,256 square meters in order to use it as evidence for a claim for cancellation of ownership transfer registration in the area of 785 square meters in Yong-gun, Nam-gun, Nam-gun; (b) obtained a false confirmation document to the effect that in order to register the transfer of ownership of the said land pursuant to the Special Measures Act, he/she was selected by three guarantors and issued a false confirmation document to the effect that he/she completed the registration of ownership transfer;
Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged a letter of fact confirmation in the name of E, a private document related to rights and obligations.
B. On December 14, 2015, the Defendant at the time of exercising the above investigation document submitted to the employees of the above public service center of the competent court, who knew of the forgery, as described in paragraph 1, one copy of the document verifying the forged E, as if it were the document duly formed.
2. Determination
A. The crime of forging a private document is established when the form and appearance to the extent that the nominal owner can regard it as a document is sufficient to mislead the general public into the genuine private document prepared in the name of the nominal owner. Thus, it does not necessarily require the signature or seal of the nominal owner. However, whether it is sufficient for the general public to mislead the private document into the real private document prepared in the name of the nominal owner should be determined by taking into account all the circumstances such as the form and appearance of the document, the process of the preparation of the document, its type, content, and its function in the transaction (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 95Do221, Dec. 26, 1997; 2005Do2518, Sept. 14, 2006).
(1) The defendant is to E around August 7, 2015.