Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against Defendant A and the conviction against Defendant A in the judgment of the second instance.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment and one year of imprisonment) imposed on Defendant A by the lower court for each of the appeals by Defendant A is too unreasonable.

B. According to the prosecutor’s appeal (the second judgment of the court below), based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of mistake of facts, the court may fully find the Defendants guilty of forging private documents and exercising the above investigation documents among the facts charged in the case of 2013No2442. Nevertheless, the second judgment of the court of appeal has erred by mistake of facts as it acquitted the Defendants. 2) Each punishment against the Defendants in the second judgment of the unfair sentencing judgment of the court of the second judgment of the court of unfair sentencing (the defendant A: one year imprisonment, and the fine of one hundred and fifty million won) is too uneasy and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal ex officio, this Court held the case by combining them with the appeal of the defendant A and the prosecutor against each judgment of the court below. Each of the crimes committed by the defendant A falls under concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and shall be sentenced to a single punishment at the same time pursuant to Article 38 of the Criminal Act. In this regard, the part against the defendant A and the guilty part against the defendant A among the first judgment of the court of first instance cannot be maintained.

However, despite the existence of such reasons for ex officio reversal, the prosecutor's assertion of mistake of facts on the acquittal portion among the second judgment of the court of appeal, and the prosecutor's assertion of unreasonable sentencing on the defendant B (which is against the second judgment of the court of appeal) still becomes subject to the

B. The second judgment on the prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts is made in the name of K, taking into account the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the above court below as to the charge of forging private documents and the uttering of falsified documents against the Defendants.