The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for one year for the crime of fraud.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles were granted the representative director’s right of representation or power of representation of the representative director of the I Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) by the victim G, and the Defendant prepared and exercised a certificate of custody of cash according to the victim’s intent within his/her authority. As such, the Defendant does not support the Defendant’s liability for the crime of preparing private documents for qualification as a result of the preparation of a certificate of custody of cash and the crime of causing the occurrence of a certificate of custody

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below convicting this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles.

2) The lower court’s unfair sentencing (eight months of imprisonment for fraud, two months of imprisonment for preparation of private documents for qualification and two months of imprisonment for accompanying) is too unreasonable.

B. A prosecutor 1) The victim G misunderstanding of fact merely knew that the Defendant transferred the instant company to the Defendant’s father’s father’s name, and did not know that the Defendant prepared and exercised each real estate transaction agreement to purchase each of the instant land by using the victim’s representative director’s name.

Therefore, the Defendant is liable for the crime of preparing private documents for qualification in the course of the preparation of each real estate transaction contract, and the crime of committing private documents prepared for qualification in the course of the execution of each real estate transaction contract.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant on this part of the facts charged is erroneous.

2) The lower court’s unfair sentencing (eight months of imprisonment for fraud, two months of imprisonment for preparation of private documents for qualification, and two months of imprisonment for accompanying) is unreasonable.

2. Determination on the Defendant’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. Taking full account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the Defendant’s preparation and exercise of a cash verification from the victim, who is the representative director of the instant company.