The judgment below

Among the guilty part and the innocent part, the victim C.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the acquittal portion of the lower judgment’s judgment, the same person’s driver’s license is proved on August 22, 201 with respect to the unlawful uttering of official document as of August 22, 201, and thus, the act of using another person’s driver’s license for the purpose of verifying his/

(See Supreme Court Decision 2000Do1985 Decided April 19, 2001). Furthermore, not only where a driver’s license under another’s name is used for verifying the identity of an illegal user, but also where the driver’s license is used for verifying the identity of the nominal owner as stated on the driver’s license is used for verifying the identity of the illegal user, it is deemed that the crime

Therefore, the defendant's act of exercising his driver's license in the name of G for the purpose of confirming the status of G constitutes an unlawful uttering of official document.

Nevertheless, the court below acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) On August 23, 201, the Defendant’s unlawful uttering of official document constitutes an unlawful uttering of official document, since this part of the Defendant’s act was used for verifying another’s driver’s license for the purpose of identifying his identity.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(3) According to the evidence adopted by the court below regarding the violation of the Punishment of Violences, etc. (Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Bodily Injury to Victims C, the court below acknowledged the fact that at the time of the instant case, the Defendant extracted the sorain steel bar, a dangerous object, and

Nevertheless, the court below rendered a judgment not guilty on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles.

(4) Violation of the Punishment of Violence, etc. Act (a collective injury, deadly weapons, etc.) relating to a knives related to the victim D or E.