1. Examining the reasoning of the judgment of the court below in light of the records, the court below reversed the judgment of the court of first instance which found the Defendant guilty on the ground that there is no proof of crime regarding the alteration of each private document and the aiding and abetting of private document among the facts charged in the instant case and found the Defendant not guilty, and there is no error of law by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court and the lower court, it is justifiable to have determined that the lower court convicted the Defendant of each of the facts charged in the instant case (excluding the part not guilty in the grounds) and the fact that each of the alteration document was used and the exercise of the aforementioned investigation document, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning. In so doing, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the

In addition, pursuant to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for more than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing is allowed. Thus, in this case where a more minor sentence has been imposed on the defendant, the argument that the sentencing of the

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