The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant agreed to establish a main office of the Association of this case and use the name thereof under the condition that the defendant made a donation to the Association of this case with the president I, an incorporated association H (hereinafter “the Association of this case”), and therefore, the defendant's act of preparing and issuing each of the certificates of this case is deemed to have obtained a comprehensive consent or implied consent from the Association of this case, the nominal owner, and thus, the elements of the crime are not satisfied or the illegality of the crime is excluded. Even if the defendant cannot be deemed to have obtained an implied consent, even if he believed that he/she obtained such consent, he/she prepared and issued each of the certificates of this case, and thus, it cannot be deemed that there was an intentional act of forging and uttering private documents, and therefore all of the facts charged of this case were guilty, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of forging private documents and the crime of uttering

2. Determination

A. Since the crime of forgery or alteration of a private document refers to the preparation of a document in the name of another person by a person who is not authorized to prepare it, if the title holder explicitly or implicitly consented to the preparation or alteration of the private document, it does not constitute the crime of forgery or alteration of the private document (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Do235, May 30, 2003).

In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below based on the above legal principles, it is recognized that the defendant agreed to establish the Jinju Branch of the Association of this case and use its name on the condition that the defendant would contribute to the Association at the time of concluding the contract on the establishment of the Jinju Branch of the Association of this case with I.

However, the court below duly adopted and examined the evidence, that is, the following circumstances that the defendant first established the Jinju Branch of the Association between I and I.