The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2, the summary of the facts charged in the instant case is as follows: ① the Defendant, as if he was the representative of the clan of this case, intended to change the name of the registered person with respect to real estate owned by the clan to the Defendant; ② the Defendant prepared a letter of delegation and an application for registration of change in the name of the registered person, and submitted it to the registry official, thereby gathering the qualification of the representative; ② the Defendant, after completing the registration procedure for this purpose, made the registration procedure and exercised the false fact in the register, which is the original instrument, and thereby,

The lower court: (1) The Defendant was elected as the president at the extraordinary general meeting of the clan of January 5, 2008 and February 17, 2008.

However, since each resolution of the above general assembly did not go through legitimate procedures, it is difficult to see the defendant as the legitimate representative of the clan, and ② The resolution of each general assembly which elected the defendant as the chairperson of the clan is not legitimate.

Even if the decision to dismiss the provisional disposition case was delivered to the defendant on the following day after the letter of decision to dismiss the provisional disposition case was prepared, there was a considerable dispute about the qualification of the representative in the clan before that day, so the defendant could have been aware that there was a problem about the qualification of his representative at the time of committing the crime. ③ Furthermore, the defendant submitted an application to register the change of the representative of the Gu or the registration of the change of the indication in the name of the registry and changed the name of the representative of the clan to the defendant on May 27, 2008. The defendant was served on May 21, 2008, and thus, he did not take any measure even if there was sufficient time to withdraw the above provisional disposition registration procedure.