The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B shall be punished by imprisonment for a year and six months.

Defendant .

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court found Defendant A guilty of this part of the facts charged, in collusion with the co-defendant A, etc. (as to the above Article of the private document) even though there was no forgery of the certificate of performance guarantee, certificate of subrogation performance guarantee, certificate of subrogated performance guarantee, employee reduction certificate, and certificate of issuance (as to the letter of subrogation performance guarantee) under the name of the president of the NAFFC in collusion with the co-defendant A, etc.

B. Sentencing 1) Each sentence (Defendant A: Imprisonment with prison labor for 1 year and 6 months, and Defendant B: Imprisonment with prison labor for 2 years) declared by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2) Each of the above types sentenced by the court below by the prosecutor is deemed to be too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment as to Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., (i) joint Defendant B’s charge of forging a private document on September 23, 2015; and (ii) “A’s copy of the joint contract with a face value of KRW 10 billion for which the Defendant’s seal attached from AD was received from the e-mail of the e-mail of the e-representative of the e-mail of the e-representative of the e-mail, which is the wind outputd from the text point.

J with the copy of the above joint project agreement, and with the seal of the President of the NACF, and the J was in possession of it in advance.

K has affixed a seal in the name of the president of the agricultural cooperative.

As above, the forged joint business contract cans from the wording point and sent e-mail again to AD, and Defendant A told Defendant A of the forgery by telephone, and Defendant A is fine because Defendant A was presented to G.

was made.

After diving, in contact with Defendant A, the face value of the joint project agreement should be revised to KRW 5 billion. However, Defendant A should be given the original text, so it should be given to Defendant A, so the same day should be given.