The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant, as a partner who entered into a technical consultation agreement with H with the consent of H, has prepared a technical consultation agreement in the name of the bank for the settlement of disputes. While H did not properly settle the accounts with the Defendant, the Defendant, who is a partner, sent a notice of dismissal on June 24, 2015, cannot be deemed a legitimate termination of a partnership agreement, and the agreement is still valid even at the time of the instant crime. Therefore, the Defendant’s preparing and exercising the technical consultation agreement in the name of the bank for the settlement of disputes does not constitute a crime of forging private documents and a crime of performing documents for the investigation.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case is erroneous as a matter of law.

B. Improper argument of sentencing is unfair because the sentence imposed by the lower court (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The subject to which the intention or concept expressed in a document prepared by the representative director of the relevant legal doctrine company in a manner that represents his/her representative qualification belongs is a stock company that is not an individual representative director, and the nominal owner of the document shall be deemed a stock company. Whether the preparation of the document constitutes the foregoing Article should be determined by whether the originator has the authority to lawfully prepare the document in the name of the stock company

The legitimate representative director of the original corporation is entitled to do all judicial or extrajudicial acts concerning the business of the corporation, and the legitimate representative director of the corporation.

Even if the representative director comprehensively delegates his/her authority and allow another person to perform the business of the representative director, it is not allowed to prepare documents in the name of the stock company on an exceptional basis only when delegated or consented to the preparation of documents in the name of the stock company individually and specifically (Supreme Court Decisions 74Do1684 delivered on September 23, 1975, Supreme Court Decisions 74Do1684 delivered on September 23