Liability for an act of changing a resident registration certificate’s photograph;

With respect to identification certificates such as resident registration certificates, photographs belong to the principal matters representing the person concerned, and the attachment of photographs to another person's photograph will impair the identity of the existing certificate and bring about the result of creating a new certificate with probative value. Therefore, it constitutes the crime of forging public documents.

Article 225 of the Criminal Act

Supreme Court Decision 4290Ma52 delivered on April 12, 1957 (Supreme Court Decision 4540 delivered on April 12, 1957, Supreme Court Decision 225(2)1297 of the Criminal Act)

Defendant

Defendant

Daejeon District Court Decision 74Gohap32 delivered on the basis of the Daejeon District Court Decision 74Gohap32

Supreme Court Decision 75Do422 Delivered on March 25, 1975

The appeal is dismissed.

245 days under detention prior to the imposition of judgment in the trial shall be included in the original sentence.

The summary of the grounds for appeal by the defendant is as follows: first, the defendant's act of removing the same person's photograph from another's resident registration certificate and attaching the photograph of the defendant's photograph is to be forged, but there has been a violation of law by misunderstanding the legal principles of the crime of forging Public Document, second, the defendant, although he presented the above altered resident registration certificate to the Army Security Unit, has influenced the judgment by misunderstanding the fact that the court below was found to have exercised it although he did not have presented it, and third, the sentencing of the defendant is too unreasonable.

Therefore, with respect to the grounds for appeal in violation of the above law, the act of attaching photographs to another person's identification card such as a resident registration certificate belongs to an essential material fact representing the person to be proved, and thereby impairing the identity of the previous certificate and creating a new certificate of probative value. Therefore, the court below is just and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the act as a forgery of official documents, and the court below reviewed the various evidences duly examined by the court below as to the grounds for appeal of mistake of facts, based on records, and further examined the testimony of the non-indicted witness before remanding the above facts at the time and time of the crime of violation of the above law, it is reasonable for the court below to find out the defendant's motive and behavior as to the crime of violation of the above law, since the defendant's testimony of the non-indicted witness at the bar security unit at the time of the original time and at the time of the crime of violation of the above law, and it is not reasonable for the defendant to use the above defendant's name and behavior as a result of the above investigation of unfair sentencing.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and 245 days of detention prior to the pronouncement of judgment shall be included in the sentence of the court below in accordance with Article 57 of the Criminal Act. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Limited Jin-jin (Presiding Judge)