The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts) at the time of the police investigation, the Defendant stated as follows: “The fact that the Defendant affixes D’s seals (hereinafter “D’s seals”) on each page of the waiver of the right of retention at the seat of D in front of the U.S. model”; and “The fact that D’s seals issued by the U.S. law office differ from D’s seals and affixed D’s seals again because they differ from the head, and the Defendant’s mixed seal impression was issued, and the Defendant’s mixed owner’s seal impression is also affixed (hereinafter “D’s seal impression”). However, the police interrogation protocol contains the same description as the Defendant’s mixed signature and seal affixed by the Defendant, which misleads the police into the Defendant’s statements.

In addition, the police did not go through the procedure to confirm the contents of the statement of the defendant although this part of the statement is unclear, and the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misconception of facts.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the police prepared a suspect interrogation protocol (which was either 104 to 116 pages of the evidence record) contrary to the Defendant’s statement by misunderstanding the head of Level 1 and Level 2 with the head of Level 2.

In addition, in full view of the evidence presented by the court below, the defendant's assertion of mistake is not accepted, since it is recognized that the defendant was guilty as stated in the facts charged in this case.

① On October 2, 2015, upon the Defendant’s complaint, the Defendant appeared as a witness in Daejeon District Court Branch of Daejeon District Court 2015 order 2015 order 309 order order, and the first letter of waiver of the right of retention was affixed and sealed on the same page as D, and the second letter was affixed and sealed at the time when the Defendant is mixed.

At the time of the examination, the defense counsel asked questions by classifying between the head of the first and the second chapter, and the defendant also clearly separate the two.