The guilty part of the judgment of the court below is reversed.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, each of the facts constituting a private document.

1. Scope of trial of this court after remand;

A. On January 17, 2013, the Defendant was sentenced to not guilty of imprisonment with prison labor for the following reasons: (a) one year; (b) one year; (c) one year; (d) one year; and (e) one year; and (e) one year; and (e) one’s attempted fraud against the owner, such as the victim I; and (e) one’s attempted fraud against the victim D.

B. The Defendant appealed each on the conviction on the grounds of mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and unfair sentencing, on the grounds of an erroneous determination of facts (not guilty part) and unfair sentencing (with respect to the remaining portion of the offense), and the judgment prior to the remand was all dismissed.

C. Accordingly, only the Defendant appealed on the conviction part of the judgment of the party prior to the remanding of the case. The appellate court reversed the conviction part of the judgment prior to the remanding of the case and remanded it to this court.

Therefore, in the judgment of the court below, the part concerning attempted fraud against victim D in the judgment of the court below is already separated and confirmed as the prosecutor did not appeal, so the judgment of this court is limited to the remaining part except the above attempted

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant (1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (A) as the representative of E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “E”), the Defendant, as the representative of E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “E”), is a contract with the purport that the instant reconstruction contract E newly constructs a reconstruction apartment to acquire the remainder of 10 households except for the portion of the association members, and the amount borrowed for the construction shall be repaid by E, but the members shall pay only the contributions, the relocation expenses used for the construction, and the expenses incurred.

The defendant did not think that the term of the contract would be disadvantageous to the defendant, but it was proposed that the representative of the union will continue the construction by changing the term of the contract from I, and also the loan will be created.