Defendant

The sentence of the court below against the accused (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

With respect to the alteration of a private document claiming the misunderstanding of facts by the public prosecutor, the alteration of a private document, the uttering of a private document, and the accusation, as stated in the facts charged, the Defendant deleted and uses the F name, “non-party 2” following the purchaser column of the instant sales contract, as stated in the facts charged, and even though the Defendant was found to have received a complaint from F, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, by misunderstanding the facts and not

The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant claiming unfair sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

Judgment

With respect to the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts, the court below held that with regard to whether the defendant deleted the entry of "foreign two persons" following the F name of "F in the sales contract of this case", it is not sufficient to recognize that the defendant deleted the entry of "foreign two persons" under the sales contract which the defendant holds as a result of appraisal (not more than two rights 372 and 472 of investigation records) and notice of the result of document appraisal (not more than two rights 472 of investigation records). The other evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is insufficient to acknowledge it, and there is no other evidence to prove it, and there is no evidence to prove that the alteration of the private document and the exercise of the altered private document premised on this premise. In order to find the defendant guilty of the facts charged of the accusation of this case, it should be recognized that the defendant filed a complaint for the purpose of criminal punishment of "foreign two persons", "non-party 2, who are known to him, in his possession" in the sales contract of this case.