(영문) 대전지방법원 2015.04.09 2014노2221 | 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) 대전지방법원 2015.04.09 2014노2221

사문서위조등

Text

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

Reasons

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the fact-finding) is that the Defendant is delegated by the J, the document titleholder, and prepares a letter of payment written in the facts charged. Therefore, the crime of forging private documents and uttering of the above investigation document is not established.

2. Determination

A. A. Around December 10, 2012, the summary of the facts charged: (a) the Defendant stated in the column of the letter of payment using a computer that “each letter shall pay the unpaid construction cost to creditors E, F, G, H, and I, as soon as possible; (b) made five copies of the letter of payment in the name of J; (c) arbitrarily stamped the seal under the name of J on the back to the name of the J; and (d) forged and exercised five copies of the letter of payment under the name of J, which is a private document related to rights and obligations, for the purpose of exercising the said letter of payment.”

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence in its judgment.

C. However, it is difficult to accept the judgment of the court below for the following reasons.

1. Whether the establishment of the relevant legal principles is determined by the form of whether the document is copied with the name of another person in the preparation of the document, and whether the content of the document is true shall not affect the establishment of the crime of forging documents, except where there is a special penal provision.

Therefore, in case where a document in the name of a truster is prepared on the basis of the beginning of the entrusted authority, the crime of forging documents is established, but in case where the representative or the agent of another person has the authority to prepare a document by using the name of the representative, the representative or the name of the principal directly, and where the document is prepared in the name of the representative, the name of the representative or the name of the third party, or the name of the principal directly, with the intent to make himself/herself or

유사 판례

-대법원 2014.05.16 2014도2577

-대법원 1983. 10. 25. 선고 83도2257 판결

-대법원 1987. 7. 21. 선고 87도564 판결

-대법원 2007. 10. 11. 선고 2007도5838 판결

-대법원 2003. 9. 26. 선고 2003도3729 판결