All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. The defendant's grounds for appeal shall be proved to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). However, the selection of evidence and the probative value of evidence based on the premise of fact-finding belong to the free judgment of the fact-finding court (Article 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act). For the reasons stated in its reasoning, the court below determined that the defendant attempted to forge the victim's certificate of borrowing the victim's name and submit it to the court to obtain money from the damaged party, and rejected the defendant's appeal as to mistake of fact-finding.

The Defendant’s argument in the grounds of appeal is the purport of disputing the determination of facts by the lower court. It is nothing more than denying the lower court’s determination on the selection and probative value of evidence, which belongs to the free judgment of the fact-finding court. In addition, even if examining the reasoning of the lower judgment in light of the aforementioned legal doctrine and the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of the authenticity of seal imprints, failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, or exceeding the bounds of

2. As to the reasons for the prosecutor’s appeal, the conviction in a criminal trial shall be based on evidence with probative value sufficient to have a judge feel true enough to have a reasonable doubt, and if there is no such proof, even if there is no doubt as to the defendant’s guilt, the conviction may not be rendered (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2001Do2823, Aug. 21, 2001; 2005Do8675, Mar. 9, 2006). The lower court as to the conflict part of the facts charged in the instant case.