The part concerning the defendant's case of the judgment below concerning "the part concerning the crime" shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the lower court found the Defendant not guilty on the grounds that there was no proof of the crime, and found the Defendant guilty on the charge of forging private documents and uttering of falsified investigation documents, and sentenced the Defendant to one year and six months of imprisonment. Since the Defendant’s appeal only became final and conclusive as it did not have any profit in the appeal, the subject of the judgment by the lower court is limited to the part of the Defendant’s case.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal dismissed the assertion of mistake of facts on the seventh trial date of the party trial.

The punishment of the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

3. Although the amount of the judgment by fraud is above 260 million won, since the defendant has not yet received the written application of the victim, it is inevitable to sentence the defendant to the punishment.

However, the court below's sentencing seems to be too difficult in light of the following circumstances: (a) the defendant made a confession of all the facts charged in the trial, and there is no record that the defendant was punished for the same kind of crime; (b) the defendant was released from the construction without being properly guaranteed an opportunity to settle other accounts due to paralysis with the victim who was the owner of the building while performing construction works in an inferior position; and (c) there are some other circumstances to take into account the background and circumstances of this case, such as the possibility that a partial additional construction cost claim has occurred to the defendant due to the victim's design change, etc.; (d) the defendant paid the money to the subcontractor as the construction cost, etc. for the subcontractor; (e) most of the defendants paid the money by fraud as the cost of construction for the subcontractor; and (e) other various circumstances, which are the motive and circumstances of the crime in this case;

4. In conclusion, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and thus, the defendant's appeal is guilty in the part of the judgment below's case under Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure