The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The scope of the appellate court’s trial filed a public prosecution against each embezzlement of the defendant, the fact that the private document was committed, and the exercise of the above investigation document, and the lower court acquitted all of the facts charged.

Since the prosecutor appeals only to the use of private documents and the use of the above investigation document, the scope of the appellate court's trial is limited to the part of the judgment below as to the above charged facts, and the remainder of the judgment below is finalized.

2. According to the F’s statement and evidence corresponding thereto, the court below acquitted the Defendant of the facts that the Defendant forged and used the F’s certificate, but there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles.

3. Summary of the facts charged in this case

A. On July 6, 2010, the Defendant, using a computer located at the Defendant’s office located on L/C on July 6, 2010, stated that “The actual details of the provisional registration: J, racing-si, racing-si, racing-si, and A-si: H: H, racing-si, racing-si, racing-si, racing-si: F, F-si, racing-si, racing-si, racing-si, and F-si, if the ownership wishes to terminate the provisional registration, F-si shall immediately terminate the provisional registration, and the registration shall be made at the same time, and the registration shall be made at the same time, and the registration shall be made at the same time.” After stating that “I copy of the F seal Certification, July 6, 2010,” the Defendant forged the actual letter of confirmation of the provisional registration in F’s name, affixed the seal issued by F under the name of F, and forged one document of confirmation of the provisional registration.

B. On March 9, 2015, the Defendant, at the racing police station located in Dong-dong, Dong-dong, Sejong-si, and exercised the actual confirmation document of the forged provisional registration as if it were a document duly formed.

4. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court’s judgment, F and B are the total sum of 6,351 square meters of G, H, and I forest in racing-si (hereinafter “the instant forest”).