In the case of Fictitious Declaration of Intention in Collusion, an formal agreement between the parties was made, which is why the record related to these contents being filled out at the register may not be seen as a false entry and not be considered as having committed a crime in false entry in officially authenticated original deed.
However, what matter in false entry in officially authenticated original deed are not the actual facts but “facts on rights and duties”. Thus, it is right to judge false entry not only on the existence of the legal acts or the literal meaning of the authentic deed they caused but also on the legal effectiveness.
Therefore, making government official to fill out an authentic deed by affecting as if the fictitious declaration of Intention in Collusion is an effective legal action, which is not, can not be but called an false entry, regardless of existence of appearance. Admitting private autonomy doesn’t mean allowing declaring ineffective legal action as if it had legal force and recoring fake facts on the authentic deed.

【대상판결】대법원 2017. 2. 15. 선고 2014도2415 판결
  1. 공소사실
  2. 제1심과 원심의 판단
  3. 대상판결 요지
 [연 구]
  Ⅰ. 들어가며
  Ⅱ. 공정증서원본 등 부실기재죄
  Ⅲ. 통정허위표시 사안에 관한 판례의 태도
  Ⅳ. 통정허위표시와 공정증서원본 등의 부실기재죄의 성부
  Ⅴ. 맺으며
 [참고문헌]
 [Abstract]

• 고제성(춘천지방법원 속초지원) | Ko Je-Sung (Sokcho Branch Court)