All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

In relation to the non-guilty portion of the judgment below of the court below, even if the defendant failed to directly produce the certificate of employee of the Financial Supervisory Service, it constitutes an exercise of the above investigation document since it was used in accordance with the use of the document.

Nevertheless, the lower court, among the facts charged in the instant case, acquitted the Defendant on the use of a falsified document, thereby misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment, confiscation) is too uneased and unfair.

Defendant: The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

Judgment

An event in the crime of uttering of forged documents, etc. regarding prosecutor's assertion of legal principles refers to the use of forged documents, etc. in accordance with the method of utility of such documents as if the authentic documents or contents thereof are true documents. It does not necessarily mean that a criminal himself/herself directly presents them (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 75Do422, Mar. 25, 1975). The other party can be used in a state where he/she can recognize forged documents, and the other party does not have to recognize the contents thereof (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do4663, Jan. 28, 2005). As stated in the court below, the defendant stated that he/she had worn the forged certificate of employee of the Financial Supervisory Service, which was not seen in clothes, and even if B stated in the court of the court below that the defendant did not memory the defendant's identification card under the item of the employee card, thereby supporting the defendant's assertion.

All of the above circumstances.