The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, it is just for the court below to have found the defendant guilty of all the modified charges of this case on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. In so doing, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of free evaluation due to violating logical and empirical rules, failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, as alleged in the grounds of appeal, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the establishment of the crime of forging private documents, the crime of forging private documents, the crime of preparing private documents for qualification and the principle of prohibiting disadvantageous changes in the disadvantage of the defendant.

The argument that each of the crimes of this case constitutes an impossible crime among the grounds of appeal that the nominal owner gave consent to each of the crimes of this case, or that each of the crimes of this case constitutes an impossible crime is asserted by the defendant as grounds of appeal or by the court below's decision not to be subject to judgment ex officio, and thus, is not a legitimate ground of appeal. Furthermore, the above argument by the defendant cannot be accepted, even

In addition, the argument that the judgment of the court below erred by violating logical and empirical rules and failing to properly examine the basic facts for sentencing is ultimately an unfair argument for sentencing.

Accordingly, under Article 383 subparag. 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for more than ten years is imposed, an appeal is permitted on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where a minor sentence is imposed against the defendant, the argument that the above assertion and punishment are unfair because they are too unreasonable is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

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