The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that C received 50 million won or more without any consideration, and it did not obtain it by deception from C, and there was a fact that C entered D personal information in the delegation column of the delegation contract written by C. However, although the Defendant did not know the content of the contract and affixed D seal, and it did not constitute fraud and forgery of private documents, etc., the Defendant was guilty of all the facts charged of this case. Such judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts or in the misapprehension of legal principles.

2. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined at the court below: ① the Defendant stated consistently to the effect that: (a) the Defendant: (a) the victim proposed to sell paintings, etc. among the curios owned by D first; and (b) the Defendant received them at the remittance cycle without any consideration by approaching the Defendant; (c) the victim and D merely believe the Defendant’s assertion as they appear to have no relation to the first time in the court of the original instance; (b) the victim and D are hard to believe the Defendant’s assertion as they appear to have been in the absence of any relation to the first time in the court of original instance; and (c) the victim stated to the effect that “the Defendant was unaware of the right to transport, donate, and sell all curios owned by D, which are stored in the Germany and Suwon Warehouse warehouse, to the effect that “the Defendant delegated the authority to transfer, donate, and sell all curios owned by D to the F department stores; and (c) the Defendant did not have any authority to transfer the said curios to the Defendant as well as the right to transfer the curios to the Defendant’s hall.