Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts (the part of the case in 2012 order394) was directly prepared by K and L, the nominal holder, and each of the loan certificates in the name of K and L (hereinafter “each of the loan certificates in this case”) in the part in 2012 order 394 case. The judgment of the court below which found Defendant guilty of all of the charges in this part of the charges, although the Defendant did not have forged and used it, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts

(2) The sentence of the lower court against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The above sentence of the lower court against the Defendant by the Prosecutor is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. We examine the defendant's argument of mistake of facts. The court below rejected the defendant's argument in detail under Paragraph 3 under the title "determination of the defendant's argument" in the judgment of the court below with the same argument as the above reasons for appeal. The court below can only recognize the facts that the defendant withdraws in cash from the head of the Tong on October 21, 2003, and KRW 10 million on November 3, 2003 (the response to the request for financial transaction data as of September 28, 2012), and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the defendant delivered the above withdrawn cash and KRW 10 million to K, which is the same as the above reasons for appeal, and ② K did not know the defendant's original account from the court of the court below to the court of the court below, and it did not borrow money from the defendant, and there is no sufficient reason for the defendant to receive money from the office of the court of the court below to the court of the court below to the extent that the defendant did not have any sufficient reason to receive money from the defendant's own own own own account.