The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for eight months.

An appeal by a prosecutor.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (part 2018 Highest 7016) and written statement of direct refusal from office (hereinafter “written consent from the instant direct refusal”) prepared on May 16, 2017

A) Since the Defendant’s seal was affixed on the side of the F name, it is difficult to view that the form and appearance to the extent that the F, a nominal owner, can be seen as a document written by the said F, would suffice for the general public to enter the same into the real private document written by the nominal owner. Therefore, the crime of forging private documents and the crime of uttering of the said private document is not established. (ii) The sentence of the lower court (Defendant A: Imprisonment with labor for 10 months) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles (not guilty part) on the part of Defendant B, even though Defendant B conspiredd with the exercise of Defendant A and the use of a falsified investigation document, there were errors in misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles. 2) The lower court’s sentence of unfair sentencing (Defendant A: 10 months of imprisonment, Defendant B: 5 million won of fine) is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The crime of forging a private document in determining the mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is established when the form and appearance to the extent that the nominal owner can be seen as a document prepared in the form and appearance of the nominal owner and sufficient extent to mislead the general public into the real private document prepared in the name of the nominal owner. It does not necessarily require the signature or seal of the nominal owner. However, whether it is sufficient for the general public to enter the document in the real private document prepared in the name of the nominal owner should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the form and appearance of the document, as well as various circumstances, such as the preparation process, type, content, and function of the document

In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, are examined as follows: (a) the statement to the direct payment of the position of this case is the nominal owner; (b) the statement to the direct payment of the position of this case is the F, the nominal owner.