The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal did not obtain F’s consent, and did so under F’s name without authority after preparing the instant agreement and power of attorney.

Nevertheless, the lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the instant facts charged by misunderstanding facts.

2. Determination

A. On August 30, 2012, the Defendant: (a) obtained a written agreement in the name of creditor E, debtor, and the victim F to be a joint and several surety with the intent to exercise at a coffee shop located in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, Dongdaemun-gu; (b) on August 30, 2012, the Defendant forged one copy of the written agreement in the name of the victim by stating “F” in the upper joint and several surety column of the F Il-dong G building G building 528; and (c) marking the prepared seal in advance.

B) At the time and place specified in the preceding paragraph, the Defendant stated the fact that the victim has not delegated D with the fact of preparing a notarial deed, but entered the victim as a joint guarantor for the Defendant’s debt amounting to KRW 46,800,000, and then forged one proxy letter in the name of the victim by means of marking the victim’s personal information in the delegating column. 2) At the same time and place specified in the preceding paragraph, the Defendant used the forged agreement and proxy letter to D without knowledge of such circumstance.

B. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of the instant facts charged on the ground that there is no other evidence to acknowledge the fact that the Defendant knew that the Defendant had not obtained F’s permission at the time of preparing the instant agreement and power of attorney in the F’s name, based on the records, based on the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, based on the following circumstances:

(c)review the case;