Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against Defendant D and A and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed, respectively.

Defendant

D. Judgment ..

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Notwithstanding the testimony at the court below held that there was no fact that U U was involved in the crime, the court below found Defendant U guilty by taking a written protocol of interrogation of the suspect to the joint Defendant R in the court below as evidence and sentenced Defendant U guilty.

However, in light of the following circumstances, there is an error of mistake of facts in the judgment of the court below which found Defendant U guilty, since the statement of Defendant R in the court below is more reliable than the protocol of interrogation of each prosecutor's office about Defendant R, which is not consistent with the court below's common defendant.

(1) The contents of each protocol concerning interrogation of suspect against the defendant R, which is jointly in the original trial, are not consistent.

② The common defendant R of the original trial appeared as a witness in the original trial and testified that there is any error in the contents of the statement made by the prosecutor in the prosecution.

③ In the original trial, the joint Defendant R stated in the lower court that “The joint Defendant R stated that Defendant U’s certificate of his U’s seal impression is necessary to take over the amusement room.”

④ Inasmuch as it was refused to request the Defendant R to lend money to the Defendant U, Defendant R made a false statement at the prosecutor’s office due to an appraisal related thereto, Defendant R made a false statement at the lower court, and became aware that he/she may take an oath and be punished for perjury (a crime of perjury stated in the Reasons for Appeal seems to be a clerical error in the statement of reasons for appeal) in the lower court, Defendant R testified as above and submitted a true statement.

B. Although Defendant Q, who was a co-defendant of the lower court, issued a certificate of seal imprint, certificate of seal imprint, certificate of resident registration, and a certified copy of resident registration card to the co-defendant of the lower court, Defendant Q, a private village type, upon the request of Defendant R, was not aware of the crime plan and did not share the act of forging the clan rules and minutes.