The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. The decision of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case, despite the fact that the Defendant conspiredd with M and forged endorsement, is difficult to understand the contents of the statement of M in violation of the empirical rule, and according to N’s investigation agency and court statement, etc., the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The following facts charged against the Defendant were raised by the ex officio judgment prosecutor.

B. 1) An application for changes in the contents of the foregoing paragraph was filed, and this Court permitted changes in the subject of the judgment, and the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained. However, the prosecutor’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of the court of this case, despite the above reasons for misunderstanding of facts, this paper examines the following. (B) The defendant is a person operating D Co., Ltd in the racing-si, and M is a person in charge of overall business, such as fund management by transfer of the above company. Since the above company’s financial resources become difficult, the defendant and M were forged and used to exercise the right to use the 3rd M Co., Ltd.’s rubber name stamped in the first endorsement column of the promissorysory note, which is a customer in the financial institution’s first endorsement. (A) The F Co., Ltd., Ltd., (1) the F Co., Ltd.’s office around August 2012, 201, whose payment date was 20.