The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In the instant protocol of statement, the Defendant: (a) although there was no signature, seal, or unmanned seal on the instant protocol of statement, E arbitrarily recorded the name of the Defendant; and (b) affixed seal or unmanned seal using a third party

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on different premise is erroneous by misunderstanding facts and affecting the judgment.

B. The court below’s sentence of imprisonment with prison labor for one year, which was sentenced to by the defendant, is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Although the lower court also asserted that the Defendant had the same purport as the grounds for appeal, the lower court recognized the circumstances as indicated in its reasoning, and determined that the instant facts charged was proven in view of the following: “The fingerprints attached to the seal and signature of the instant protocol of statement is identical to the Defendant’s fingerprints, and the signature written in the protocol of statement is highly likely to be written by the Defendant.”

Examining the record, such as the fingerprint taken from the instant protocol of statement and the Defendant’s fingerprint are identical, the court below’s judgment is just and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts cited in the grounds of appeal, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, by misapprehending the facts cited in the grounds of appeal.

B. The sentencing guidelines for determining unfair sentencing are six months from the imprisonment to two years (general penalty).

The defendant does not repent his mistake.

In this context, considering the following circumstances, comprehensively taking into account the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, the background and contents leading to the instant crime, and the circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s sentence is too unreasonable.

3. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the ground that it is without merit.