The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Of the facts charged against the defendant of mistake of facts, the remainder [the part concerning the forgery of private documents and the uttering of falsified investigation documents, and the embezzlement of April 19, 201] excluding the part of the charge (as of April 6, 201, the part concerning the embezzlement of falsified investigation documents and the embezzlement of falsified investigation documents, around December 15, 2009, the uttering of falsified investigation documents and the uttering of falsified investigation documents, around April 26, 201, the occupational embezzlement and the uttering of falsified investigation documents, around May 207, and around March 201, hereinafter “instant charges”) do not constitute a crime for the following reasons, but all of the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty was erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(1) Of the facts charged in the instant case, the part concerning the fabrication of private documents and the uttering of the above investigation document around December 15, 2009 is prepared by G around December 2009, with the explicit or implied consent of the Defendant, while delivering the seal imprint certificate and the seal imprint certificate to the Defendant. As such, the crime of forging private documents and the uttering of the above investigation document is not established.

The part concerning the forgery of a private document and the uttering of a private document on April 26, 2011 among the facts charged in the instant case was prepared by G on April 26, 201, on the following grounds: (a) as the part concerning the forgery of a private document and the uttering of a private document was led by the sale of standing timber at the time; and (b) the part not only was the direct seal affixed by G; and (c) the Defendant, etc. attended the place where G’s seal is affixed while preparing a sales contract for standing timber and affixed it; and (d) the minutes of the clan dated April 26, 201 with explicit

Article 22(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act provides that “The Defendant shall purchase the instant land owned by the said clan (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) with the money after the Defendant terminated the said clan’s installment savings account in accordance with the direction of the former president of the Victim’s clan, and then the Defendant shall purchase the said clan’s land (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) on May 2, 2007. However, since the said land is farmland, the ownership transfer registration shall not be made in the name of the clan.