The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The court below found the Defendant not guilty of all the charges of fraud against F, G, N, andO, each private document forgery, the use of the above investigation document, and AH. The prosecutor appealed only about the forgery of each private document, the use of the above investigation document, and the fraud against F, G, N, andO that the prosecutor did not appeal. Since the judgment of the court below became final and conclusive as to the acquittal of each fraud against F, G, N, andO, the scope of the judgment of the court below is limited to the forgery of each private document, the use of the above investigation document, and the fraud against H.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented by the prosecutor as to the gist of the grounds for appeal, the court below acquitted the Defendant on all of the charges of forging each private document among the charges of this case against the Defendant, and acquitted the Defendant of forgery of each private document, the use of the above investigation document, and the fraud of AH as to each private document, the use of the above investigation document, and the fraud of the fraudulent act against AH, because it is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or in the misapprehension of legal principles.

3. Determination

A. The Defendant, under the pretext that each private document forgery and the use of each private document forgery is necessary for the business of constructing officetels (a summary of this part of the facts charged). The Defendant, who received a certificate of seal imprint, certificate of seal imprint, etc. from the construction business operators and investors, had the custody of each private document under the pretext that each private document forgery and the use of each private document forgery is made without the consent of the nominal owner.

(1) a contract for construction works in F’s name.