Incheon Criminal Attorney | An Incheon Attorney Assisted a Client and Concluded a Forgery of Private Documents Case With a Non-Prosecution Decision

The Incheon criminal attorney's client explained that, before his death, his father had repeatedly told the client that he would leave the land to him.

However, when his father passed away from a sudden worsening of his illness before the land gift procedure had been properly completed, the client himself took his father's registered seal and prepared the land gift agreement, the application for registration of ownership transfer, the power of attorney, and other documents to proceed with the gift procedure.

The Incheon criminal attorney's client was accused in civil and criminal proceedings by his siblings while proceeding with the above procedure.

The client's siblings took issue with the fact that the client had carried out a gift procedure contrary to their father's wishes during his lifetime and had ultimately received the entire gift of the land alone, without the siblings' permission.

The client's siblings in the Incheon criminal attorney's case accused the client on four charges, including forgery and uttering of private documents and false entry in public electronic records and uttering.

The client argued that, while he had personally cared for his father for 20 years, the siblings, who had never once visited, became blinded by gain as soon as their father died and accused the client out of suspicion, and he requested the assistance of an Incheon criminal attorney.

We asked the Incheon criminal attorney about the issues in this case.

The Incheon criminal attorney reviewed the legal principles applicable to the client's case and explained the potential criminal punishment as follows.

The client faced charges including forgery of a private document under the Criminal Act, on the allegation that he had falsified a private document using the deceased father's registered seal.

A person who, for the purpose of uttering, forges or alters another's document or drawing relating to rights, duties, or certification of facts shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding ten million won.

Article 232 of the Criminal Act (Preparation of a Private Document by Fraudulent Use of Title)

A person who, for the purpose of uttering, fraudulently uses another's title to falsely make or alter another's electromagnetic record or other special media record relating to rights, duties, or certification of facts shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than five years or by a fine not exceeding ten million won.

Article 234 of the Criminal Act (Uttering of Forged Private Documents)

A person who utters a document, drawing, electromagnetic record, or other special media record made by means of a forged private document, a false medical certificate, or the like shall be punished by the penalty prescribed for each respective crime.

The client was also charged with having caused the registry office official in charge to enter false information into the computer with respect to the forged private document.

A person who, for the purpose of causing errors in the handling of affairs, falsely makes or alters a public official's or public office's electromagnetic record or other special media record shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten years.

Article 229 of the Criminal Act (Uttering of Forged Official Documents)

A person who unlawfully uses a public official's or public office's document or drawing shall be punished by imprisonment or imprisonment without labor for not more than two years or by a fine not exceeding five million won.

The client had once prepared a gift agreement one year earlier, while his father was still alive.

This was the father's expression of intent to gift the land to the client.

However, circumstances were identified showing that at the time the matter had been postponed to a later date because of financial issues such as the inheritance tax and the gift tax, and this was presented as evidence.

In this case, the complainants did not properly present evidence that the client had committed a crime, so the evidence was insufficient.

The complainants asserted that the client had forged and uttered each of the documents in the deceased father's name without authority, but the attorney explained that there was no clear evidence of this.