A. In light of the fact-finding (not guilty part) that the Defendant had already opened a part of the account before he withdraws KRW 6 million from the N account of K (K) (hereinafter “K”), and the content of the prison interview recording file between the Defendant and the J, the Defendant is credibility in the consistent statement of the J that the Defendant did not permit the opening of the account. Therefore, the Defendant may acknowledge the fact that he, without authority, forged the document under the name of K and prepares a document by citing his agent’s qualification.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant as not guilty of the forgery of each private document, the display of each private document, the preparation of each qualification-based private document, and the exercise of each qualification-based private document among the facts charged against the defendant is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts, which affected

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too minor.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The summary of the facts charged in this part of the charges states that “The Defendant established a legal entity under the name of the J and distributed profits from selling computer parts and heavyphones while managing the legal entity,” and the J established K on June 21, 2016 and transferred the same to the Defendant along with three copies of passbooks in the name of the non-corporate entity.

Since then, when the J was investigated by the police due to three of the above passbooks transferred, the defendant was unable to use the name of the corporation and instructed the defendant to destroy the corporate design, etc., but the defendant did not destroy it.

1. On July 27, 2016, the Defendant forged private documents: (a) on the application form for deposit transaction kept there at the Geumjin-gu Dok-dong branch of the Kujin-gu Dokdong-gu Dokdong-gu D Bank, the Defendant stated the “K” in the name column and the “S” in the business registration number column; and (b) marked the corporate design of K, which was kept in advance on the back of the name column.

Accordingly, for the purpose of uttering, the defendant is given a letter of application for transaction in the name of K, which is a private document.