The remainder except the non-guilty part shall be reversed.

Defendant

A. Imprisonment of 10 months, and Defendant B.

A. Regarding the time when each constituent analysis report of this case was forged by the prosecutor (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (not guilty part of the judgment of the court below), since the term of validity of the above report was not specified and thus there was no need to change the date of preparation. Thus, the Defendants did not output and keep all the relevant component analysis report on the date of preparation, and each time they received the order and output and submit it after modifying the name, etc. of composition analysis report of Korean files stored on the previous computer. Accordingly, the time of forgery of each constituent analysis report of this case should be between the date of submission of the order and the date of submission. However, the court below deemed the time as the date of preparation of the relevant component analysis report (date of preparation of crime list) stated in the relevant component analysis report as the date of December 21, 2007, which was acquitted on the ground that the statute of limitations has expired, this part of the judgment of the court below erred by misapprehending facts or by misapprehending legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendants (10 months of imprisonment, 8 months of imprisonment, and 8 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended execution and 80 hours of community service order in June) are too uneasible and unfair.

B. The sentence imposed by Defendant A and the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Examining ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by both ex officio determination, the prosecutor’s first instance of Paragraph (2) among the facts charged in the instant case No. 2013Kadan2358 (the judgment of the court below which found guilty and acquitted) in the first instance of Paragraph (2) (the judgment of the court below) is as follows: “The period from December 24, 2007 to January 22, 2008”; and “attached Form No. 11” in paragraph (11) of the same Article is as “the date of the order of each private document written in the list of crimes”.