The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact that the representative director of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd related to the fabrication of private documents and the display of private documents stated no consent to the preparation of each business partnership agreement entered in the facts charged (hereinafter “each business partnership agreement of this case”), the defendant can sufficiently be recognized to have exercised each of the contracts of this case with the consent of the J without the consent of the J.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the facts charged is erroneous and adversely affected by the conclusion of the judgment.

B. As long as the Defendant related to occupational breach of trust has forged each of the instant business partnership agreements, it constitutes occupational breach of trust that the Defendant received fees from the victim LAF and the damage company.

Even if the defendant obtained the consent of J in preparing each business partnership agreement of this case, the defendant's establishment of a separate company and received fees from the victimized company constitutes occupational breach of trust by causing property damage to the victimized company by doing his/her own business without permission of the company.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the charged facts of this portion is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

C. As long as the Defendant related to occupational embezzlement forged each of the instant business partnership agreements, it constitutes occupational embezzlement to receive money from the victim LAF through the LAF.

Even if the defendant obtained the consent of J in preparing each business partnership agreement of this case, it constitutes occupational embezzlement that the defendant received the money from the victim F Co., Ltd. through the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the charged facts shall be erroneous or erroneous, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.