All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (misunderstanding of facts) did not prepare a power of attorney No. 1 and H forged the first power of attorney.

B. The prosecutor (unfair sentencing)’s sentence of the lower court (a prison term of eight months, two years of suspended sentence, and 80 hours of community service) is too uneased and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, stated the Defendant’s personal information on the first power of attorney, signed and sealed the Defendant’s signature and seal on the first power of attorney, thereby forging the first power of attorney.

It is justified to determine that the defendant's complainant filed a complaint, and there is no error of law as alleged by the defendant.

B. It is desirable to refrain from rendering a judgment of the first instance court on the grounds that the conditions of sentencing are not changed in comparison with the first instance court’s judgment on the prosecutor’s unfair argument of sentencing, and that the sentencing of the first instance does not deviate from the reasonable scope of discretion. Although the sentence of the first instance falls within the reasonable scope of discretion, it is reasonable to refrain from rendering a judgment of the first instance court on the grounds that the sentence of the first instance falls within the scope of discretion and is somewhat different from the appellate court’s opinion (Supreme Court Decision 2015Do3260 Decided July 23, 2015). In accordance with the foregoing legal doctrine, there is no change in the conditions of sentencing compared with the lower court’s judgment on the grounds that new materials on sentencing have not been submitted in the first instance court, and in light of all the records and arguments of the instant case, including the Defendant’s age, environment, sex, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and the circumstances before and after the crime, the lower court’s sentencing is too excessive beyond the reasonable scope of discretion.

3. In conclusion, the appeal by the defendant and the prosecutor is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act, since all of the appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.