beta
Text
Defendants are not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the Defendants is publicly announced.
Reasons
I. The summary of the facts charged [2013rd 588] (Defendant A) (hereinafter “instant land”) was attempted to sell the land E (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by D C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C C, even if the Defendant was not the representative of
1. On April 11, 2013, the Defendant forged a private document with the “written report on the business registration” kept at the Ganyang-si, Mayang-si, Kimyang-si, Kimyang-si, in which the Defendant had a photoflocked the “written report on the business registration” in the “written report on the business registration” in the “written item column of the personal information column,” stating the “DC species C, F, A, and F” as “F” in the “written item column to be corrected,” and affixes a seal stating that the Defendant had been kept at the next page of the reporter.
Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising, the Defendant forged one copy of the registration statement of business registration under the name of the DCF Association, which is a private document on the rights and obligations.
2. The Defendant exercised the above investigation document as if he had duly completed the registration of a business under the above-mentioned registration correction report, which was a public official in the name of the above Kimhae-Un, who was aware of the forgery.
3. Around April 9, 2013, the Defendant said that the instant land was owned by Category D C C C C C, at a certified judicial scrivener office located in the name and incompeting time, the Defendant said that the instant land was owned by Category H of C C C.
However, in fact, the land of this case is owned by the DC branches and the representative of the DC Branch is F, so the defendant did not have any intention or ability to sell the land of this case.
The defendant received 200 million won as down payment from the victim to the agricultural bank account in the name of the defendant.
Accordingly, the defendant was given property by deceiving the victim.
[2014 Highest 79 [Defendant A] (Defendant A) was elected as the chairman of the Mawyang-type Council on July 17, 2011, and Defendant B is an adviser of the Mawyang-type Council.
Defendants.