Part of the judgment of the first instance court, and the forgery of private documents, the uttering of private documents, and the uttering of private investigation documents on July 28, 2010, and August 2, 2010.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Although the judgment of the court of first instance which acquitted all of the facts charged should be pronounced guilty for the following reasons, there is an error of misconception of facts in the judgment of the court of first instance which acquitted all of the facts charged.

1) The non-existence of comprehensive delegation of a right to collateral security against the land owned by the non-existent defendant constantly prepares documents related to the creation of a right to collateral security and pays interest on existing loans with a new loan granted through the act of exercising the right to collateral security against the land owned by the defendant does not fundamentally resolve the loan and interest problem, and eventually, an act of consuming loan fees and causing enormous property damage to E. In addition, if the defendant forged the report card of Korean nationals residing abroad and caused F to do so as to do so, the statement of E that there was no comprehensive delegation against the defendant is credibility. Therefore, even if the defendant obtained comprehensive delegation from E concerning the preparation of documents in the name of E, it cannot be said that there was a comprehensive delegation from E with regard to the act such as preparing documents in the name of the defendant, it cannot be said that there was an act of the defendant beyond the scope of the delegated authority, and even if the defendant received comprehensive delegation from E, the defendant's act of creating a right to collateral security against the BJ of the defendant, which is not related to his debt, and the act of establishing a right to collateral security (hereinafter.).