The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On May 9, 2012, the Defendant: (a) established the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”); (b) taken over all 1,000 shares issued; and (c) was appointed as a director; and (d) operated with the auditor D; (c) while there was no sales performance; and (d) the deficit was accumulated for operating expenses, the Defendant was expected to receive a loan of detention in the name of the company from D around March 2013 to actively engage in promotional activities.

Upon receipt of a loan under the name of the company, the defendant, who is the director of the company, is also likely to be responsible for joint and several sureties, demanded that D resign from the director of the company and follow the procedures for registration of change of the director of the company. On March 28, 2013, the defendant delivered a certificate of personal seal impression issued directly by the defendant to the office staff of the certified judicial scrivener E-office, and affixed a seal on the certificate of personal seal impression prepared by the office staff

As a result, on March 29, 2013, the company changed its director F into D's wife on March 29, 2013.

Nevertheless, on April 29, 2014, the Defendant, for the purpose of having D subject to criminal punishment, forged a letter of resolution by all shareholders who appointed inside directors of the instant company, and the Defendant’s wife F of the Defendant, on March 29, 2013, in the Jeju District Public Prosecutor’s Office’s Office, “Defendant D” used a certificate of personal seal issued by the complainant for the loan, a certificate of personal seal impression issued by the complainant for the loan, and a certificate of personal seal impression in the name of the complainant. On March 28, 2013, the Defendant made a false registration of change in the name of the inside director.

“ ......” submitted a written complaint and rejected D.

2. Determination

A. In a criminal trial, the finding of guilt must be based on evidence of probative value, which leads a judge to the conviction that the facts charged are true beyond a reasonable doubt.

If the prosecutor's proof does not reach such a level of conviction, even if there are suspicions of guilt, it cannot be determined with the benefit of the defendant.

(b)in this case;