All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. If a person, other than an attorney-at-law, accepted a legal case from a client and actually acted on behalf of the client as a substantial agent for all the procedures necessary for the client’s application and execution of the case, such act constitutes an act of handling legal affairs prohibited by subparagraph 1 of Article 109 of the Attorney-at-Law Act, even though he/she was entitled to handle a part of the case;

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4356 Decided June 28, 2007 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Do4356, Jun. 28, 2007). In addition, “agent” under Article 109 subparag. 1 of the Attorney-at-Law Act includes not only a legal representative handling a legal case under the name of his/her agent, but also an act necessary for using legal knowledge on behalf of his/her principal, or a case in which he/she directly performs a case in fact with no legal knowledge or under the lead of handling a case for himself/herself (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 9Do2193, Dec. 24, 199; 2013Da28728, Jul. 24, 2014). However, the recognition of a criminal fact constitutes proof to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt (Article 307(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act). The selection of facts and probative value of evidence based on recognition

(1) On February 2, 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the court below introduced the land (hereinafter “instant land”) as stated in the judgment of the court below, which is the object of the Cheongju District District Court G Auction Case (hereinafter “auction Case”) to I who desired the purchase of the land, and then set the bid price and prepare a bid list. After I became the purchaser in the auction case, I paid the sale price, registration cost, etc. and completed the registration of ownership.