A. Defendant 1) Since the holder of a document forged by mistake of facts has consented to, or can be recognized as a presumption of consent to, the preparation of a document by the accused, the crime of forging private documents and the crime of uttering of a falsified investigation document is not established. 2) The sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (fine 4 million won) by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) On November 10, 2014, the Defendant asserted that on the part of the document title holder, on the part of the document title holder, the consent was given by the document title holder, that “The bid bond shall be borne on the side of Gwangju, the share shall be 50:50, and the operation shall be carried out on the side of Busan. The tender shall be held jointly and jointly by K and L shall be held in the side of Busan. The bid shall be held jointly and there was a consent to the preparation of the document. However, as alleged by the Defendant, even if the document title holder consented to the above proposal by the Defendant, it is difficult to deem that the above title holder consented to the preparation of the document of this case merely because it is difficult to view that the document holder consented to the preparation of the document of this case, the above assertion by the Defendant is without merit. [The Defendant, at its own discretion, has prepared a bond transfer contract and a written request for change of contractor (hereinafter “instant documents”).

(Evidence Records No. 666 or 668). 2) The presumption of presumption of presumption regarding the assertion that the consent of the document titleholder may be recognized refers to the case where it is anticipated that the victim would have naturally accepted if the content of the act was known, in light of all objective circumstances at the time of the act, even if there was no actual consent of the victim. However, there was no real consent of the nominal owner at the time of the act, but at the time of the act.