The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts in the judgment below that found the Defendant guilty on the sole basis of F’s statement, although the Defendant instigated F to forge the instant vehicle transfer certificate or was not involved in the aforesaid Article.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: (a) around 17:00 on September 20, 201, the Defendant forged a motor vehicle transfer certificate with the content that he/she transferred the H bus from D office located under the 908 Si-ri-si Office to F, Inc., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Inc., Ltd., Ltd., to D, Inc., Ltd., Inc., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., and submitted it to the Association for the purpose of requesting F to submit it; (b) in the same day, F had F prepare a vehicle transfer certificate with the content that he/she transferred the chartered bus to D, Inc., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., and written it as G, Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., and written it with the signature and seal affixed to his/her name, and sent it to the I.S., by facsimile. The Defendant, for the purpose of exercising its rights and duties under the name of G.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged in full view of the evidence duly admitted.

C. First of all, among the circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below and the court below, the defendant was aware of the necessity of a certificate of vehicle transfer when he was an entity engaged in the same kind of industry, such as chartered bus transport business, and the defendant sent the relevant documents to F by facsimile to F.