A. In fact, it is evident that the Defendant, who is aware of the fact, prepared an application for withdrawal and cancellation of execution of the application for provisional seizure of the instant real estate and submitted it to the court, and thus, the above documents were forged.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case is erroneous and adversely affected by the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below which is unfair in sentencing (3 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s determination as to the assertion of mistake of facts is based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated, namely, ① the name and resident registration number of the Defendant at the right side of the application for withdrawal and cancellation of the execution of the provisional seizure of the instant real estate received by the public service center of the Daegu District Court on October 16, 2013; ② the above written evidence was determined by the lower court as being highly likely to be written by the Defendant as a result of the commission of appraisal by the lower court; ③ the same as the seal affixed by the Defendant when submitting the instant complaint; ④ the Defendant sent the same application to the police officer on July 8, 2014 at the time of the police investigation.

In full view of the fact that the Defendant prepared and submitted a written withdrawal of a complaint on the instant case, including fabrication of private documents, and submitted it, the Defendant made a false report stating that “In relation to the instant claim provisional seizure case, the Daegu District Court 2013 Kadan 6498, the Defendant forged a written application for withdrawal and cancellation of provisional seizure of real estate, and submitted it to the Daegu District Court for its use.”

The judgment of the court below that determined the person is just and there is an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding facts.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion of facts is justified.