All appeals filed by prosecutors and defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Prosecutor 1) did not make any investigation or examination of the misunderstanding of the facts regarding the acquitted portion, and F also stated that K did not delegate the right to manage the corporation E with respect to the said portion. However, the first instance court erred by misapprehending the following: (a) only the Defendant’s assertion that K entrusted with F by F would arrange E and transfer I points to the Defendant; (b) under each private document regarding “a comprehensive transfer contract for business”, “a lease termination agreement”, and not guilty of the exercise of the said investigation document.

2) The punishment for one of the following reasons is unfair: (a) the punishment for an unfair determination of sentencing (3 million won in penalty) is too unhued and unfair.

B. On December 7, 2016, Defendant 1 submitted by his/her defense counsel after the period for submitting a written reason for appeal of mistake of facts as to the guilty portion has expired, and the contents indicated in the summary of his/her pleading were reflected in the petition of appeal to the extent of supplementing the grounds for appeal

However, among the above arguments, the grounds for appeal stated in the petition of appeal (the judgment of the court of first instance was erroneous in the facts contrary to the rules of evidence, and the purport that one deliberation punishment is too heavy) is irrelevant to the reason (the defendant's act constitutes a justifiable act that does not violate the rules of society.

“The allegation in the grounds of appeal cannot be a legitimate ground for appeal.”

Defendant, who was formally owned by K, Inc.

With the authority delegated by the F and K to return I, the comprehensive transfer contract for the business, “the comprehensive transfer contract for the business,” and the report on the closure of the lease contract for the I is merely the case made on the extension thereof. As long as there was the comprehensive consent of the person in whose name it was made, even if the defendant voluntarily sealed the representative director F’s personal forum and affixed the I report on the closure of the business, the crime of forging the private document cannot be established, and the first instance court cited the fact.

2) The sentence of punishment for an unfair one deliberation shall be pronounced.