The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In misunderstanding the facts and legal principles, the report of this case did not state the "representative" as the "representative" in the report of this case, and the defendant, who is the representative of the account, visited the defendant to prepare the report of this case according to the bank's explanation that in order to suspend payment in the account, the report of this case was prepared, and there was no intention to imitate the defendant

Therefore, even if the elements for the formation of a private document is not satisfied, the act of the defendant constitutes a legitimate act, since the head of the same literature does not suspend payment of the account to prevent the damage of the same literature in the situation where the head of the same literature group wrongfully executes the expenses of the same literature group.

In addition, the defendant does not have any fact of assaulting the victim.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (an amount of KRW 1.5 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the crime of preparing a private document based on the preparation of qualification imitated private document and the reproduction of qualification copied is established when a person who does not have legitimate power of representation or power of representation prepares a document with the representation of qualification of another person as if he/she had legitimate power of representation or power of representation.

According to each evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below, the defendant stated the "name C" column of the report of this case in the "name" column of the "name" and stated his name under the above, the defendant prepared the report and submitted it to the bank staff, and submitted the identification number certificate attached to himself as the representative of the CJS conference, and the documents prepared by the bank also stated in the "name A" as the deposit control registration of the account of this case was registered at the request of the representative.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendant is not the chairperson of the Dongmun-gu Council.