The judgment below

Of those, the conviction against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for nine months.

The judgment of the court below.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A’s misunderstanding of facts did not intend to write the receipt certificate under the name of Defendant A or to exercise the above receipt certificate. The Defendants, by negligence, delivered the original receipt and a copy written to the attorney’s office, and submitted it to the court at the above office. Thus, the Defendants did not exercise the above receipt certificate or attempted to mislead the court by using the above receipt certificate, but the lower court convicted the Defendants of this part of the facts charged. The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine.

B) Although Defendant A was not guilty of deceiving the victim J, N, P, and R by deceiving him, the lower court convicted all of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts.

2) The lower court’s sentencing against the illegal Defendants is too unreasonable.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to the facts, Defendant A’s report on succession to the status of fishery permission in the name of D, a ship sales certificate, and a fishing vessel alteration registration application, which are private documents concerning rights and duties, and obtained property by forging and exercising each application for the registration of alteration of a fishing vessel, and by deceiving the victim E. Although Defendant A fully recognizes the fact that the victim had been aware of the fact that the victim had been involved in the remaining shipment of the ship owned by Defendant A and had the right to permission, the court below acquitted the victim of this part of the facts charged.

2) The lower court’s sentencing against Defendant A, who was improper in sentencing, is too uncomfortable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances, the lower court’s determination on the Defendants’ assertion of mistake as to the Defendants’ forgery of private documents, the use of a falsified document, and attempted fraud (i.e., the lower court’s determination on the Defendants’ assertion of mistake as to the Defendants’ attempted fraud) in light of the following circumstances, etc., the lower court is a private document on the rights