The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. The summary of the facts charged was selected as the president of the partnership at the general meeting of executives around April 19, 2014, but around June 5, 2015, the Defendant was suspended from performing his/her duties as a decision of disposition (hereinafter “decision of provisional disposition”), despite the suspension of duties as a result of the Seoul Northern District Court Resolution 2014Kahap20188Kahap, Seoul Northern District Court Decision 2014Kahap 20188Kahap, the Defendant, at around August 5, 2015, prepared a letter of delegation of the instant provisional disposition (hereinafter “the instant delegation contract”), which was delivered by the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office C of the law office, in preparing the letter of delegation of provisional disposition (hereinafter “the instant delegation contract”).

1. D Association President A (hereinafter “the instant association”) stated “A,” and indicated “B (Mandatary E and Attorney F)” in the mandatary column, and affix the official seal of D Association President A (Attorney E and Counsel F).

Accordingly, for the purpose of exercising authority, the Defendant prepared one copy of the delegation contract of this case, which is a private document concerning rights and obligations, using the qualification as the president of the above partnership without authority, and exercised one copy of the delegation contract of this case, which is prepared with qualification inside the above time, at the above time and place, to the employee in charge of the above law office C.

2. The defendant cannot prepare a power of attorney in the capacity of the president of the partnership, for whom the suspension of duty as the president of the partnership has been suspended due to the decision of disposition. If the defendant was aware of the above decision of provisional disposition and the defendant prepared it in the name of the president of the partnership, this constitutes a crime of preparation of private documents by conspiracy of qualification (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 87Do145, Aug. 18, 1987; 2005Do4072, Jul. 26, 2007). However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and duly examined by the court, i.e., (i) the execution of duty as the president of the partnership of the defendant was suspended due to the decision of provisional disposition in this case on June 5, 2015, but the agent was not appointed, (ii) the president of the partnership, as well as the director and the auditor.