The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal (not guilty part) is as follows: (a) the victim issued the Promissory Notes to secure the payment of KRW 30 million borrowed on June 9, 201 and KRW 20 million borrowed on October 31, 2011; and (b) the Defendant was well aware of such circumstances.

There has been continuous monetary transactions between the defendant and the victim.

Even if the Defendant and the victim did not agree that the Promissory Notes in this case be useful as a security for the victim’s other obligations, the Defendant’s preparing a notarial deed of the Promissory Notes in this case after all of the underlying claims have ceased to exist, and using it to receive a seizure and collection order of the Promissory Notes in this case constitutes the crime of false entry

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s judgment: (a) examined the adopted evidence; (b) paid KRW 30 million to the Defendant on January 20, 201; (c) paid the Defendant a debt worth KRW 30 million on June 9, 201; (d) the complainant paid the Defendant a debt worth KRW 30 million on June 9, 201; and (b) around February 2012, the date of the said payment, the complainant issued the Defendant a certificate of personal seal impression indicating the proxy form and use of a promissorysory note in the name of the issuer of the promissorysory note in the name of himself/herself and her husband as “official evidence”; (c) the Defendant and the complainant continued to engage in money transactions until August 2012; (d) the Defendant refused payment on or after the order of August 2012 by the complainant; and (e) made a notarized deed using the aforesaid relevant documents issued by the complainant as an executive title; and (e) made a collection order on or around 31, 2012.