The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, by misapprehending the legal doctrine, is the owner of a forest land G of the Suwon-si District G (hereinafter “instant land”), and F is the trustee who was entrusted the instant land from the Defendant in the name of the trustee who was entrusted by the Defendant.

In doing so, F did not prove that the Defendant had ownership or right to dispose of the instant land after being entrusted with the title thereof, as seen above, F, the trustee, prepared necessary documents to dispose of the instant land, which is a trust property, and F, the trustee, was comprehensively allowed the Defendant to use his name.

It is reasonable to view it.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty on the facts charged of this case without recognizing it is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles or in the misapprehension of legal principles, which affected the conclusion

B. The sentence of the lower court (an amount of KRW 2,00,000) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination on the misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine 1) In a case where an asset is trusted in the name of the trustee without any burden on the truster of the relevant legal doctrine, the trustee comprehensively allowed the trustee to use his/her name when disposing of the asset or exercising other authority.

It is reasonable to view that, in preparing documents necessary for the disposal of trust property in the name of the trustee, even if the trustee did not obtain an individual consent from the trustee, the crime of forging or uttering of private documents is not established (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Do4812, Nov. 30, 2007). However, in the name trust, when imposing a burden on the truster is crossed off, or when the trustee bears an obligation for collateral security in the name of the trustee with respect to the property under the name of the trust, he/she is allowed to have the truster comprehensively use his/her name when the trustee bears an burden on the management, disposal, or interest in the property under the name of the trustee.

§ 23.