All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts at the F’s request, Defendant A sent Defendant B and E to the Gyeyang Saemaeul Community Depository, and the Defendant B did not confirm the contents, and did not know that each of the resident registration certificates and the loan-related documents under the name of H were forged. However, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts that found Defendant A guilty of the forgery of public documents, each of the forged public documents, each of the forged public documents, each of the forged private documents, each of the forged private documents, and each of the above investigation documents, and thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) In so doing, the lower court’s punishment of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B’s imprisonment (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Defendant A1) In relation to the assertion of mistake of facts, there is a combination of two or more co-offenders who jointly process a crime, not a legally fixed type of punishment, but a conspiracy with two or more persons to jointly process a crime and realize the crime. Although there was no process of the whole conspiracy, if the combination of the intent is made in order or impliedly through several persons, the conspiracy relationship is established. As long as such conspiracy was made, even those who did not directly participate in the act of the crime shall be held liable for the other co-principal's act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 98Do30, Mar. 27, 1998; 200Do3483, Nov. 10, 200; 200Do3483, Nov. 10, 200, which constitutes a criminal offense, and thus requires strict proof for this purpose. However, if the defendant recognizes the fact that he directly participated in the act of the crime and denies the criminal intent, the subjective element of the crime is a subjective element.