The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, an altered official document is exercised.

1. Progress of lawsuit and the scope of the actual adjudication of this court;

A. 1) The lower court convicted all of the facts charged in the instant case, and the Defendant appealed on the grounds of misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and unreasonable sentencing. 2) The lower court rejected all the Defendant’s assertion and dismissed the Defendant’s appeal.

On this issue, the Defendant appealed.

3) The Supreme Court rendered a judgment prior to the remanding of the instant facts charged, which found the Defendant guilty of fraud, that there was no error by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on deception in fraud. ② Prior to the remanding of the instant facts charged, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the probative value judgment and evaluation of evidence, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules. Furthermore, the lower court’s judgment prior to the remand of the case should be reversed on the grounds that the exercise of altered official documents, the use of falsified documents, and the use of the falsified documents, among the judgment prior to the remanding of the case, should be reversed. However, the lower court reversed the entire judgment prior to the remand of the case and the remainder of the conviction part (the

B. The part rejected in the final appeal on the grounds that the allegation in the grounds of final appeal was groundless in the final appeal on the grounds that the final judgment was rendered and the final judgment was rendered at the same time, and the defendant cannot contest this part, and the court that was remanded cannot make a decision inconsistent with the above, and the case where the court that was remanded for the criminal facts that occurred with the final judgment is not a meaningful part of the evidence examination.