The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) stated that the Defendant had a very difficult situation in the operation of the instant private teaching institute at the time of leasing the instant private teaching institute, and the victim living in the Philippines was well aware of it, the victim, who had been living in a foreign country more than two years, was in charge of banking business or administrative affairs in Korea by leaving his identification cards and seal imprints to the Defendant. The victim said that “if the victim wishes to lease the building because of a difficulties in operating a private teaching institute, he and she would lease the building with her own interest.” The victim directly received rent without any objection after concluding the instant lease contract, and the victim filed the instant complaint at the expiration of two years after the conclusion of the lease contract. Thus, the victim should be deemed to have comprehensively authorized the Defendant to prepare the instant real estate lease contract, the notification on the change of the private teaching institute manager and the report on the closure of business (hereinafter “the instant lease contract, etc.”).

Therefore, the defendant's act of preparing the instant lease contract in the victim's name does not constitute the crime of forging documents.

Nevertheless, the court below convicted the defendant of all the charges of this case. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant is recognized to have used the instant lease contract, etc. in the victim's name without the victim's explicit consent.

B. Furthermore, as to whether the victim implicitly and comprehensively delegated the right to prepare the instant lease agreement, including the right to lease the instant building, to the Defendant, the following circumstances acknowledged by the foregoing evidence are ①.