The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

1. The sentence imposed by the lower court (six years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Each of the crimes of this case recognized by the evidence, evidence, rule of law, and legal principles is a case where: (a) the defendant arbitrarily stolen the name of his father, siblings, and the name of a person who does not have any relationship with AGC; (b) forged various documents, such as a group resolution, resolution, sales contract, and minutes; (c) the real estate in the name of the above clan, in the name of the victim E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim”) is sold to the victim E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) in the name of real estate purchase price; (d) the crime of this case was interviewed by the victim Co., Ltd. in the name of real estate purchase price; (e) the crime of this case was inferior; (e) the crime of this case was committed; (e) the fraudulent money was not recovered from damage due to the victim’s personal debt repayment, living expenses, and gambling; and (e) the victim Co., Ltd. submitted a written petition stating his intent to punish the victim at the trial.

However, it is difficult to exclude the possibility of confirming the identity of a family member or representative, etc. who is not the defendant in the course of real estate sale or brokerage, since the defendant has no specific criminal records except for a fine imposed on the defendant for a violation of the Labor Standards Act twice, since he/she is a member of a clan, he/she is not the representative of a clan, and therefore it is difficult to exclude the possibility of confirming the identity of a family member or representative, etc., the victim submitted to the court on June 8, 2015, according to the attached documents, the victim is scheduled to present in civil cases about the identity of a pen and a seal in a civil case, and the actual seal stamp is not similar to the seal stamp, and it does not seem that the defendant has forged the seal stamp, because he/she is similar to the seal stamp, and in particular,