Of the convictions and the acquittals of the lower judgment, each private document in the separate sheet 2 and 6 Nos. 2 and 6 shall be counterfeited.

The court below rendered a judgment of innocence as to the forgery of each private document and the uttering of a falsified investigation document listed in the annexed Table 2, 2, 6, 7, and 10 among the facts charged in this case, and the judgment of acquittal as to the forgery of each private document and the uttering of each falsified investigation document listed in the annexed Table 2, 1, 3, and 4, and the judgment of conviction as to the remaining facts charged.

However, as to the guilty portion, the prosecutor filed each appeal against the guilty portion and the acquittal portion.

Therefore, among the judgment of the court below, the acquittal part which the defendant and the prosecutor did not appeal was separated and confirmed, and excluded from the scope of the judgment.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. The punishment imposed by the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In the course of deceiving victims, the Defendant forged the insurance policy as a means of committing the crime and delivered it to the victims, and immediately thereafter, the Defendant received the damaged funds. Since these acts have causal relations with each other due to a single series of continuous acts, it may be deemed as indirect evidence or circumstantial evidence of the forgery and exercise of the insurance policy. Therefore, even in the event of forging each private document as stated in the attached Table 2, 2, 6, 7, and 10 and the event of the aforementioned investigation document, it shall be deemed that there is corroborating evidence of the confession of the Defendant. Nevertheless, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of the above part on the grounds that there is no evidence to reinforce the confession of the Defendant as to the forgery of each private document and the use of the aforementioned investigation document, and there is an error of law by misapprehending the legal principles as to the supporting evidence of confession and failing to exhaust all necessary deliberation.2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing is unreasonable.

The prosecutor's legal principles or records.