The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The lower court’s determination on the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal doctrine, and Sentencing) was based on the following grounds: (a) the Defendant was aware that the details of the Defendant’s complaint were false, contrary to the truth; and (b) the Defendant did not have forged his signature on the “written request for appraisal and explanation” as indicated in the facts charged (hereinafter “written signature”).

In light of the above, the intention of false accusation was recognized.

Before the day of the appraisal and assessment briefing session written in the facts charged, the author tried to ask E to attend the text message sent to the 35th and 36th and 36th members of the apartment space indicated in the facts charged, including the Defendant, for the unreasonableness of the results of appraisal and assessment and for the future measures

The members, including the defendant, could have sufficiently predicted the contents of the discussion.

The number of members present at the meeting for appraisal and assessment was separately kept, and the defendant's relevant number of houses (A. 504) column for the same (A. 504) was indicated as the defendant's attendance (Evidence Record 119-121 of the evidence record). The title "in the upper part of the signature of this case, the member N,O, and P" clearly stated in the signature of this case that "an objection to appraisal and a request for explanation - signature" was stated.

Japan made a statement.

It is an example of empirical rule that the 60 members of the union signed the signature of the blank joint signature book with no doubt about the purpose or purpose of the use.

Since the opposing power of the president of an association and a member of the complaint as a result of appraisal were present at the meeting for appraisal and assessment, there is no reason to assume the risk of forgery of all documents signed by adding title without authority after obtaining signature at a blank state without the title in order to conceal the purpose or purpose of joint signature and to conceal the purpose or purpose of the joint signature.

Defendant’s misunderstanding of Facts

A. The reasoning of the judgment of the court below as to ① through ⑤ the Defendant’s signature at issue as follows.