(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.05.18 2016노202 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.05.18 2016노202

사문서위조등

Text

1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 7,000,000.

3. The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

Reasons

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, although the defendant was comprehensively delegated by the owner to prepare the standard contract of this case (hereinafter "standard contract of this case") as stated in the judgment of the court below, the defendant's act of preparing the standard contract of this case to arbitrarily reduce the building area without the owner's consent, as long as it is very important delegated matters in the contract of the defendant and the owner of the building, exceeds the scope of comprehensive delegation. Thus, the court below erred by mistake of fact.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court (3 million won in penalty) is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The facts charged in the instant case (the charge of forging a private document and exercising a falsified investigation document) concluded a contract with the owner D for the extension of the 4th floor of the third floor building in Jinju City, which was introduced to the designer F, and even though D did not obtain the consent of the owner D in order to reduce the area subject to reporting that is not subject to permission in the process of filing a building report, D did not obtain the consent of the owner.

Therefore, on November 26, 2013, the previous years agreed to reduce the size of DD from the Defendant, and the F, at the H construction design office located in G, Jinju-si, entered the standard design contract for the building using a computer, stating “to extend the content of design, change the purpose of use, contract area, 84.94 square meters, project owner D”, and affix the above D seal on the name side of the name.

The following F, around December 9, 2013, received a false construction commencement report from a viewer who is aware of the forgery at the above construction design office, and exercised it in a way that can can cans and attach a forged design standard contract, as it is a document that has been duly formed with the design standard contract of a forged building.

This is the defendant.

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.08.18 2016고단1143

-수원지방법원 2016.04.14 2015고단5009

-서울중앙지방법원 2017.09.27 2017고정2025

-의정부지방법원 2018.02.22 2017고정2311

-광주지방법원 2018.04.25 2017고단2893