The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal, the court below found the defendant not guilty of all the facts charged despite the fact that the defendant forged the document of this case and the fact that the document was used with the knowledge that it was forged, even if it was not forged.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged (1) For the purpose of uttering, the Defendant entered “C”, “D”, “D”, “C”, and “C” in the name column of the written reference and resolution at an unsound place on June 28, 2012, and entered “C” in the name column of the board of directors and representatives, and then forged “F”, “F”, “Executive officer and/or representative resolution” in the name column of the right holder’s name and affixed the C’s seal on the same day, and forged one copy of “C’s document reference and resolution” in the name column of the “E”, “E”, “F”, “E”, “E”, “E”, and then forged one copy of “written reference and resolution resolution” in the name column of the right holder’s name.

(2) On June 28, 2012, the Defendant offered two copies of the forged “written reference and written resolution” to H to the effect that the Defendant was placed in the voting ballot paper keeping the election ballot paper for the withdrawal from the enforcement of the G reconstruction Project Association in Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul.

B. The lower court’s judgment: (a) stated in the lower court that C and E did not know whether they actually prepared and submitted a forged written reference and resolution in their names; (b) did not know whether they received a forged written reference and resolution in the lower court’s court, and (c) did not know whether they were submitted from the Defendant; (b) submitted multiple copies of written reference and resolution in the name of another union members, but the Defendant submitted several copies of written reference and resolution in the name of another union members.