All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts is Defendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd”).

(C) The principal agent, the injured party, and the injured party, by attracting investment in 12 billion won, shall be limited to C (hereinafter referred to as “C”).

(1) The agreement to pay one billion won in consideration of the agreement (hereinafter “instant agreement”) signed on May 23, 2016 by the date of preparation on May 23, 2016 on May 13, 2016 (No. 41 of the evidence record No. 2017dan5468, hereinafter “instant agreement”).

) AB prepared and set up in C. The J, the representative of the victimized Company, is the Defendant’s E commercial building (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) to implement the content of the said arrangement.

) Of the three bonds sales, the sales proceeds will take place instead of the agreed amount. On May 26, 2016, the Defendant sent the sales agency contract to the Defendant by e-mail. On the sales contract form, the Defendant signed and sealed the company’s seal impression and delivered it to the damaged company. The Defendant used the above contract form to use the Hho Lake (hereinafter “instant heading”).

A) The Defendant sold to I. Therefore, as indicated in the instant facts charged, the sales contract for a commercial building on the instant heading room (hereinafter “the instant sales contract”) is called “the sales contract for a commercial building in question.”

) There was no use of forged or forged document for I, and the defendant was authorized to conclude a sales contract on behalf of the damaged company for the instant heading, so the defendant cannot be deemed as deceiving the victim I as stated in the case in 2018 Godan3118, and the victim had no criminal intent to commit the forgery and uttering of the instant private document, and there was no intention to commit fraud. Therefore, the court below convicted the defendant, although all of the facts charged in the instant case should be pronounced not guilty, there was an error of misconception of facts in the judgment of the court below. 2) The punishment (one year and six months of imprisonment) sentenced by the court below on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. The Prosecutor’s sentence sentenced by the lower court is the same.