The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is as follows: (a) at the time, E entered into a long-term lease contract for Kanman vehicle (hereinafter “instant contract”) in the name of G without the Defendant’s consent, who was the representative director of G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”).

Therefore, this constitutes the forgery of private documents or the compilation of private documents for qualification, and it is not reasonable for the defendant to file a complaint with E for the above facts of crime.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous as affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On February 13, 2017, the Defendant drafted a false complaint against E with the aim of having E receive criminal punishment from a certified judicial scrivener office near the Daegu Suwon-gu C Ne-distance.

그 고소장은 “E 는 2014. 10. 30. 대구 수성구 F 소재 G 사무실에서 ㈜SK 네트웍 스와 카니발 R 9 인 승 차량 장기 임대차 계약을 체결하면서 계약서 임차인 란에 ‘ 주식회사 G A’라고 기재한 후 법인 인감도 장을 찍었고, E 는 행사할 목적으로 권리의무에 관한 사문서인 A 명의로 된 장기 임대차 계약서 1 장을 위조하고 2014. 10. 30. 대구 수성구 F 소재 G 사무실에서 위와 같이 위조한 장기 임대차 계약서를 진정하게 성립된 문서인 것처럼 그 위조 사실을 모르는 ㈜SK 네트 웍스 직원에게 교부하여 이를 행사하였으니 처벌하여 달라.” 라는 내용이었다.

However, in fact, E prepared a long-term lease contract for a car using a car after obtaining consent from the defendant, and E did not forge and use the vehicle rental-related documents.

Nevertheless, on February 15, 2017, the Defendant submitted the above complaint to a police officer who is unable to know his name in the Daegu Suwon-gu public service center of the police station in the Dong-gu, Daegu-gu, Suwon-gu, and rejected E.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty by comprehensively taking account of the evidence in its judgment.

(c)

(1) the review.