Open Decision Ledger · Capital markets & finance
Active Use of False Publicly Disclosed Financial Statements, the Act of Using a Document, Causation with Another's Misunderstanding, and the Standard for Exemption from Liability for Unpaid Wages
Translated from the Korean original. Read the Korean
Supreme Court, Jan. 15, 2015, 2014Do9691 (judgment)
No holding summary · checked against points at issue. The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Case name: 특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(횡령)·주식회사의외부감사에관한법률위반·증권거래법위반·공문서위조·위조공문서행사·자본시장과금융투자업에관한법률위반·근로기준법위반·공문서변조·변조공문서행사·특정범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(허위세금계산서교부등)·업무방해
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
For the crime of unfair trading practices using financial statements containing false or incomplete representations to be established, must there be causation between the act of using the document and another's misunderstanding?
Holding
Failing to act beyond leaving falsely disclosed financial statements in place, and instead actively using them as an opportunity to obtain a pecuniary benefit while knowing that they may cause a misunderstanding, constitutes an act of using the document. Once it is used, the offense is established immediately, and actual misunderstanding, the occurrence of a benefit, and causation between the act of use and the misunderstanding are not required; the Supreme Court, viewing exemption from liability for nonpayment of retirement benefits as limited to cases where circumstances unavoidable despite best efforts are recognized in light of social common sense, dismissed the final appeal.
Points at issue, verbatim
구 증권거래법 제188조의4 제4항 제2호 위반죄의 성립요건으로 ‘허위·부실 표시 문서의 이용행위’와 ‘타인의 오해’ 사이에 인과관계가 있어야 하는지 여부(소극)
Unofficial English translation
Whether causation must exist between the "act of using a document bearing false or incomplete statements" and "misunderstanding of another person" as a requirement for the offense of violating subparagraph 2 of paragraph (4) of Article 188-4 of the former Securities and Exchange Act (negative)
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
상고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed.
Form of the test
Existing test applied Read from the decision
원심판결 이유를 이러한 법리와 원심이 적법하게 채택한 증거들에 비추어 살펴보면
Unofficial English translation
Examining the reasons for the judgment of the court below in light of this legal principle and the evidence lawfully adopted by the court below
Factors
- 허위·부실 표시 문서를 이용한 불공정거래행위를 금지하는
- 문서의 이용행위
- 사이에 인과관계가 있어야 하는지 여부(소극)
- 임금 및 퇴직금 등의 기일 내 지급의무 위반죄의 면책사유
- 임금 등을 지급기일 내에 지급할 수 없었던 불가피한 사정
Unofficial English translation
• which prohibits unfair trading practices using documents bearing false or incomplete statements
• the "act of using a document"
• whether causation must exist between the two (negative)
• an exculpatory ground for the offense of violating the obligation to pay wages, retirement pay, etc. within the prescribed time limit
• inevitable circumstances in which wages, etc. could not be paid by the payment due date
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2006. 4. 14. 선고 2003도6759 판결
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 2003Do6759 decided April 14, 2006
Decisions referred to
[1] 대법원 2009. 7. 9. 선고 2009도1374 판결(공2009하, 1374) / [2] 대법원 2006. 4. 14. 선고 2003도6759 판결(공2006상, 831) / [3] 대법원 2006. 2. 9. 선고 2005도9230 판결(공2006상, 458), 대법원 2011. 11. 10. 선고 2011도10539 판결
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
What specific behavioral marker distinguishes merely leaving a publicly disclosed false financial statement uncorrected from actively using it as an opportunity for pecuniary benefit?
Regarding the interpretation of Article 178, paragraph (1), subparagraph 2 of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act, if a new decision requiring causation or the occurrence of loss appears, this reading will be re-examined.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-16
In comparison with an independent reading by another AI model (GPT-6 Astra), which read only the original text without seeing the primary reading, 7 of the 8 axes agreed, and the readings diverged on the fourth axis (Form of the test).
Axis 4 (Form of the test): Primary “Existing test applied” vs Independent “Elements stated”
Because the Holdings states the meaning of the act of use, its requirements for establishment, and the standard for exemption from liability, and the disposition dismisses the final appeal, if the focus is placed on the statement of the standard, it may be read as Elements stated; if the focus is placed on the disposition of the case, it may be read as Existing test applied.
‘타인의 오해’ 사이에 인과관계가 있어야 하는지 여부(소극)Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The court below (Seoul High Court Decision 2014No211, 779) found the defendant guilty of violation of the former Securities and Exchange Act, and held that the same legal principle applies to Article 178, paragraph (1), subparagraph 2 of the former Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act as well, and that causation between the act of using a document containing false or incomplete representations and another's misunderstanding, and whether loss occurred, do not affect the establishment of the offense. It also found the defendant guilty of violation of the Labor Standards Act arising from nonpayment of retirement benefits.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court viewed the holding of the court below as proper in light of the legal principles of Supreme Court Decisions 2009Do1374 and 2003Do6759 and, as to the retirement benefits, found no misapprehension of legal principles under the exemption standard of Supreme Court Decision 2011Do10539, and dismissed the final appeal in its entirety.
Distinguishing conditions
- Where there are no circumstances for viewing the failure to act beyond merely leaving the state of publicly disclosed false financial statements uncorrected as actively using it as an opportunity for pecuniary benefit
- Where the content represented does not constitute a significant matter capable of affecting an investor's investment decision
- Where it is objectively recognized that the employer made every effort at repayment and presented a repayment plan to settle unpaid wages or retirement benefits at an early date and sincerely consulted with the employee side
Record verification notes
Before asserting the same conclusion, it should first be checked whether the defendant actively used the document for the purpose of obtaining a pecuniary benefit while knowing of the possibility of causing a misunderstanding, and, if it is a case involving unpaid wages, whether there were circumstances unavoidable in light of social common sense going beyond financial pressure arising from poor management.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 허위·부실 표시 문서를 이용한 불공정거래행위를 금지하는 구 증권거래법 제188조의4 제4항 제2호에서 정한 ‘문서의 이용행위’의 의미 [2] 구 증권거래법 제188조의4 제4항 제2호 위반죄의 성립요건으로 ‘허위·부실 표시 문서의 이용행위’와 ‘타인의 오해’ 사이에 인과관계가 있어야 하는지 여부(소극) [3] 근로기준법상 임금 및 퇴직금 등의 기일 내 지급의무 위반죄의 면책사유인 ‘임금 등을 지급기일 내에 지급할 수 없었던 불가피한 사정’이 있었는지 판단하는 기준
Unofficial English translation
[1] The meaning of the "act of using a document" as defined in subparagraph 2 of paragraph (4) of Article 188-4 of the former Securities and Exchange Act, which prohibits unfair trading practices using documents bearing false or incomplete statements [2] Whether causation must exist between the "act of using a document bearing false or incomplete statements" and "misunderstanding of another person" as a requirement for the offense of violating subparagraph 2 of paragraph (4) of Article 188-4 of the former Securities and Exchange Act (negative) [3] The criteria for determining whether there were "inevitable circumstances in which wages, etc. could not be paid by the payment due date," an exculpatory ground for the offense of violating the obligation to pay wages, retirement pay, etc. within the prescribed time limit under the Labor Standards Act
Summary of the holding
The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Order
상고를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The appeal is dismissed.
Provisions referred to
[1] 구 증권거래법(2007. 8. 3. 법률 제8635호 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 부칙 제2조로 폐지) 제188조의4 제4항 제2호(현행 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 제178조 제1항 제2호 참조), 제207조의2 제1항 제2호, 제2항(현행 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 제443조 제1항 제8호, 제2항 참조) [2] 구 증권거래법(2007. 8. 3. 법률 제8635호 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 부칙 제2조로 폐지) 제188조의4 제4항 제2호(현행 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 제178조 제1항 제2호 참조), 제207조의2 제1항 제2호, 제2항(현행 자본시장과 금융투자업에 관한 법률 제443조 제1항 제8호, 제2항 참조) [3] 근로기준법 제36조, 제109조
Read 2026-10-16 · Cross-read 2026-10-16. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger