The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged of this case on a different premise, even though the fact was found to have been prepared by the Defendant based on the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds for appeal

2. Determination

A. On January 31, 2014, the Defendant prepared a false statement of charges stating that “F and E forged a certificate of borrowing a loan under the name of A, and submitted a forged certificate to the appellate court in the lawsuit for the repayment of loan against A, and exercised it as evidentiary materials,” with the intent to obtain criminal punishment, the Defendant, at the residence of the Defendant at Jeju-si, Jeju-si, 101, and the former husband E and F, a former husband, for the purpose of having the Defendant punished.”

However, the fact is that E, through E, requests the defendant to prepare a certificate of borrowing in the name of the defendant about the use of the purchase price of apartment complex under the name of E by the defendant through E, and accordingly, the defendant prepared a certificate of borrowing.

Nevertheless, on January 16, 2014, the defendant submitted the above complaint to the public service center of the Kimpo police station located in 795-ro 65 Kimpo-ro, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, Kimpo-si, 795, and submitted the above complaint to the police officer whose name is not known.

B. The lower court determined that: (a) part of the statements made in F, E’s police, prosecution, and this court, consistent with the facts charged in the instant case, are not reliable; (b) there is no other evidence to acknowledge it; and (c) according to the records of the instant case, the lower court

① The above apartment cannot be readily concluded that it is owned by E, and rather, the above apartment is likely to have been registered under the name of the defendant and F.

② On September 201, the Defendant issued a certificate of personal seal impression to F with respect to the above reconstruction project.

In addition, in relation to the above reconstruction project, the defendant around September 2012 through F’s son and son and son from F.

9. 10. Holding a briefing session by facsimile the advice under the name of the head of Gwanak-gu Office to attend with a certificate of personal seal impression and seal.