The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, upon C’s request that C make a loan certificate of KRW 19 million in 2003 or that it is necessary to show the wife at the request of C, the Defendant: (a) made a loan certificate of KRW 19 million in 2003 to C for the Defendant; (b) however, there was no fact that C borrowed money from C in 201.

Therefore, since the defendant did not file a false complaint such as C, etc., the defendant should be acquitted.

On the contrary, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty is erroneous and erroneous.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (2 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of fact by asserting that it is similar to the grounds for appeal. The lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion under the title “the circumstances supporting the Defendant’s loan.” In so doing, the lower court stated in detail the reasons therefor.

In light of the reasoning of the judgment below and the following circumstances found by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged is just and it does not find any error due to erroneous facts.

1) The defendant found the defendant and asserted that C has been divorced from D due to the damage caused by the substitute payment of the vehicle (50 million won). The defendant merely prepared a false loan certificate to D and paid 20 million won per month to D in order to prevent the divorce. The defendant paid 200,000 won per month on behalf of the substitute payment of the vehicle.

However, the amount of interest paid by the defendant every month shall be 1% per month (the defendant also is the defendant.