[1] The meaning of documents in the crime concerning documents under the Criminal Code

[2] The case holding that in case where an image on the computer monitoring screen does not constitute a crime of forging a public document and uttering a forged public document on the ground that an image on the computer monitoring screen does not constitute a document related to a document under the Criminal Act, in a case where an image on the computer monitoring screen does not constitute a document for the purpose of using his/her name and age in the name and the resident registration number column of the resident registration certificate, which is inserted in the name and resident registration number column of the resident registration

[1] Articles 225 and 231 of the Criminal Act / [2] Article 225 of the Criminal Act

[1] Supreme Court Decision 2004Do788 decided Jan. 26, 2006 (Gong2006Sang, 365)

Defendant

Prosecutor

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2007No1446 Decided August 23, 2007

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

In the crimes related to documents under the Criminal Act, documents refer to a copy of the original document, which is the indication of intention or idea on the material object continuously by letters or a virtual code that can replace them, or a copy by mechanical means which can see the same social function and credibility, etc., and the contents of which can be admitted as evidence concerning major matters in the social life (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do788, Jan. 26, 2006, etc.).

The summary of the facts charged of this case is as follows: (a) around October 20, 205, the Defendant: (b) prepared and printed the name of “Stoi,” and “701226,” in a computer without authority, to use the Defendant’s age and name for the purpose of using it for the purpose of deceiving the Defendant’s name; and (c) inserted the name of “Stoi,” printed on the Defendant’s resident registration number “640209,” and (d) inserted the word “701226,” as above, on the word “the name of the Defendant’s resident registration number,” and read the word “6,4026,” and read it by using a computer cans to create image files by printing it through a computer monitor to display the image on the screen; (b) forged one copy of the resident registration certificate issued by the Administrator of Gangnam-gu, which is an official document, and at the same time, at a place as seen above, attached it to the Nonindicted Party’s resident registration certificate so that it can be used by the computer’s image.

However, in light of the legal principles as seen earlier, the image shown on the computer monitoring screen is nothing more than the display of the screen by causing an electronic reaction whenever implementing a program to see the image file, and it cannot be viewed as continuously fixed on the screen. Therefore, it does not constitute “documents” in the crime related to documents under the Criminal Act.

In the same purport, the court below is justified in finding the defendant not guilty of the facts charged in this case on the ground that the image shown on the computer monitoring screen does not constitute a document related to a document under the Criminal Act, and there is no error of law as otherwise alleged in the

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Yang Sung-tae (Presiding Justice)