1. As to the grounds for appeal by the defendant

A. As to fraud, the argument that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the amount of damage caused by fraud is not a legitimate ground for appeal, since the Defendant did not assert it on the ground of appeal, and the lower court did not render ex officio judgment.

B. Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the first instance court as to the forgery of private documents and the uttering of the above-mentioned documents, the lower court was justifiable to have determined that the lower court convicted all of the parts of the facts charged in the instant case of forgery of private documents and the uttering of the above-mentioned investigation documents on the grounds stated in its reasoning.

In doing so, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the consent or understanding of the victim with regard to the preparation and use of documents in the crime of forging private documents and the crime of gambling documents in the investigation.

2. Examining the reasoning of the Prosecutor’s appeal, it is justifiable for the lower court to reverse the judgment of the first instance that found the Defendant guilty on the thief among the facts charged in the instant case on the grounds stated in its reasoning and to render the Defendant not guilty.

There is no error of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation in violation of logical and empirical rules.

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