All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B’s imprisonment (one year and eight months of imprisonment, confiscation) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant C1’s mistake of facts does not take part in the forgery of resident registration certificates and the opening of passbook using them. As such, Defendant C did not participate in the forgery of public documents, the uttering of forged public documents, the forgery of private documents, and the uttering of falsified investigation documents. 2) The sentence of unfair sentencing (one year and four months of imprisonment) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Joint principal offenders under Article 30 of the relevant legal principles regarding Defendant C’s assertion of mistake of facts are established by satisfying the subjective and objective requirements, namely, the implementation of a crime through functional control based on the intent of joint processing and its common intent.

A person who does not directly share and implement part of the elements of a crime among the conspiracys may be held liable for the so-called crime as a co-principal. However, in order to avoid such crime, considering the status, role, control over the progress of the crime, etc. in the whole crime, the functional control of the act through essential contribution to the crime should be recognized not only as a mere conspiracy but also as a functional control exists.

In addition, in light of all the circumstances, such as the means and form of crime, the number of participants and their inclinations, the time and characteristics of the place for the crime, the possibility of contact with others in the course of the crime, the possibility of contact with others, and anticipated reaction, etc., the conspiracys could have anticipated or sufficiently anticipated that incidental crimes will be derived during the commission of the crime or going further to achieve the intended purpose, but they did not take any reasonable measures to prevent such occurrence, and eventually, if there was an anticipated crime, then they did not take any reasonable measure to prevent such occurrence.