The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is the person who has run a stock company D in Geumcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Building 402.

The Defendant issued the said D’s promissory note in the name of the Defendant, and financed the funds at a discount of the bill, expressed his mind to receive endorsement from Nonindicted E in the transactional relationship with the promissory note issued by him.

When the Defendant came to know on the books of G office located in the G office located in Pakistan-si, where the relationship with the above E was aggravated, that the Defendant kept the name plates and seals of the above G, the Defendant planned to make endorsement in the name of the said G company E on a promissory note issued by the Defendant who affixs the name plates and seals by making use of the gap in the name of the above E. A.

On August 208, 2008, the Defendant, at the above G office, made use of the gap in the above E-type at a low time and in order to exercise, forged the entry of G’s name and seal on the rights and obligations of securities by affixing his name and seal on the back of a promissory note in the name of D, the face value of which is 18,00,000, the face value of which is 18,000,000.

B. On August 2008, the Defendant, at the time of the second half of 2008, was to the other J except public prosecution in the office of the I Co., Ltd. located in Gyeyang-gu, Youngyang-gu.

As stated in the foregoing paragraph, the endorsement of the said G Company E exercised the securities in which the entry of the rights and obligations is forged by requesting the discount of the bill, in the most true manner, and by requesting the discount of the bill.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the record of judgment as to the facts charged, namely, ① the defendant’s statement is not consistent (the defendant, whose seal, etc. is affixed for endorsement of the bill of this case, did not disclose the subject of the seal affixed for endorsement explicitly by the police at the place of the police, while clearly obtaining the consent of E, and the prosecutor’s office stated that the E affixes the seal by stating that “the seal affixed by the complainant upon his request for an endorsement is affixed” (the investigation record 157 pages).