The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant: (a) the purpose of D’s request was to delete the registration of the transfer of ownership illegally transferred to the Special Measures Act; (b) D brought about the confirmation of facts of E; and (c) in the event of a lawsuit, E returned to the benefit of E; and (d) written a complaint after the Plaintiff thought that there was no problem; (b) the Defendant did not have the intent to commit the crime of forging private documents and the crime of copying the above investigation documents.

B. Sentencing (the sentence of the lower court: a fine of one million won)

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant asserted the same purport in the lower court.

As to this, the court below held that, even if the defendant was delegated to prepare a complaint from D and did not obtain consent to the preparation of a complaint in the name of E, the defendant prepared a complaint in the name of E and exercised it, it was for the benefit of D.

Even if the scope of the Defendant’s charge of forging private documents and the charge of conducting the above investigation documents is recognized, the Defendant convicted all of the facts charged in the instant case.

The evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the oral argument of the court below revealed the following circumstances: (a) as a certified judicial scrivener, the defendant was aware of the necessity of delegation from E in preparing a complaint in the name of E; and (b) prepared a complaint at the request of D, even though there was no delegation, and thus, (c) returned to E, not D, if winning the complaint.

Even if the judgment of the court below is examined closely by comparing the records and records in consideration of the fact that the defendant intentionally committed the crime of forging private documents and the crime of gambling in the above investigation document, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law by mistake of facts as alleged by the defendant.

Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. As to the unfair argument of sentencing, the appellate court has imposed sentencing in comparison with the first instance court.