All of the Prosecutor and the Defendants’ appeals are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The punishment sentenced by the court below to Defendant A (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unfair.

B. Defendant A (the mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and unreasonable sentencing) was required by the misunderstanding of facts by Defendant A (the mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles) and the misunderstanding of facts required to prove large balance and deliver to the J a copy of the statement of transactions of national bank (the document stated in No. 2 of the year No. 150 billion won in the annexed list of the original judgment) in the name of Defendant B, which was left on the Defendant’s automobile, and there was no fact that K requested to forge and forge the above passbook, and there was no other part of the two pages.

B) The lower court, by misapprehending the legal doctrine, applied Article 231 of the Criminal Act on the crime of forging Private Document to the Defendant’s act, but the above act of the Defendant is the uttering of the said private document. In addition, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the application of the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act to the Defendant.

2) The sentence imposed by the lower court (defendant B, C, and D: one year of imprisonment, and one year of imprisonment and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In the case of accomplices who are jointly processed by more than 2 persons who made a judgment of mistake of facts as to Defendant A’s assertion, the conspiracy does not require any legal punishment, but only constitutes a combination of two or more persons who conspired to jointly process and realize a crime. Although there is no process of the whole conspiracy, if the combination of doctors is made either in order or impliedly through several persons, the conspiracy is established.

In addition, strict proof is required to recognize such a conspiracy, but if the defendant denies the conspiracy, which is a subjective element of the crime, it is an indirect fact that has considerable relevance to the nature of the object.