The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

The judgment below

Part of acquittal.

A. The sentence (6 months of imprisonment) imposed on the Defendant with respect to the guilty portion (e.g., fraud or fabrication of private document) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) Do, who is a misunderstanding of fact (the fact of exercising the above investigation document) attached a sub-lease consent document to the documents attached to the complaint, attached the sub-lease consent document, attached D's signature to the sub-lease consent document, and the defendant presented forged sub-lease consent document even until the time when the police statement was made by the police.

In light of the statement, “the first written consent of the sub-lease in the police investigation” cannot be trusted at all the court below’s legal statement.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant as to the exercise of the above-mentioned documents among the facts charged in this case by reliance on the court's statement in the court below.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant is too unhued and unreasonable.

Judgment

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio, the Prosecutor filed an application for changes in indictment with respect to changes in the fraudulent part of the facts charged in the instant case, as seen below, in the appellate court, and the subject of this court’s permission was changed, the lower court’s judgment was no longer maintained.

However, notwithstanding the above reasons for reversal of authority, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is examined below.

B. Around May 1, 2015, the Defendant asserted that the facts of this part of the facts charged were false. Around May 1, 2015, at the office operated by himself/herself on the first floor of the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C building, the Defendant issued the forged sub-lease consent form as if it were genuine.

2) The lower court’s judgment and the appellate court’s evidence duly admitted and examined are as follows.