2. Determination

A. Although Defendant A was led to committing a crime in the first instance trial, the Defendant was found to have committed a second offense despite the previous conviction, the damage amount is reasonable, and the victim J was willing to punish the Defendant on the grounds that the Defendant did not implement the agreed matters in the lower trial, although the Defendant agreed at the lower court, and the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, background of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc. are all taken into account, the lower court’s punishment is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B made confession of a crime in the trial for the first time, and the fact that J and P do not want punishment is favorable. In the event that the judgment of the court below is finalized, there is a circumstance that Defendant B is no longer able to work as a staff member of the certified judicial scrivener office.

However, the crime of this case where the defendant, who works as an employee of the certified judicial scrivener office, forged the power of representation, etc. of the person entitled to make a registration and arbitrarily cancelled registration, did not comply with the fundamental and basic rules to be observed as an employee of the certified judicial scrivener office, and the punishment accordingly should be strict, the denial of the crime from the investigative agency to the original trial, and the omission of the crime, and all other sentencing factors, including the character and conduct of the defendant, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, etc., shall not be deemed to be too unreasonable.

3. As such, the Defendants’ appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all of the appeals are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.