The judgment below

Among the crimes of Article 5 of the judgment against Defendant A, the unlawful uttering of official document in 2012, and the forgery of private document.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants’ punishment (Defendant A, who appealed against the whole judgment of the court below in January, 201, but on May 9, 2013, the seventh trial date of the trial of the court below, the first, third, fourth and fifth of the crimes of unlawful uttering of official documents in 2011 as indicated in the judgment of the court below, and withdrawal of appeal on the part of the crimes of forgery of private documents and uttering of private documents in the judgment of the court below. As such, among the crimes of Article 5 of the judgment of the court below, the charges of unlawful uttering of official documents in 2012, the crimes of forging private documents, and the crimes of uttering of private documents in the judgment of the court below are deemed to have been appealed on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing only for the part of the crimes of uttering of private documents in the judgment of the court below. Defendant B: 10,72

B. Of the crimes of Articles 1, 3, 4 and 5 as indicated in the judgment of the court below, the public prosecutor’s sentence (the crime of unlawful uttering of official document in 201 among the crimes of Articles 1, 3, 4 and 5 as indicated in the judgment of the court below, the crime of unlawful uttering of official document in 2012 among the crimes of false uttering of official document in 201, the crime of unlawful uttering of official document in 7 months as indicated in the judgment of the court below, the crime of forgery of official document in 2012, the crime of false uttering of official document in the judgment of the court below, 1 month

2. Determination

A. Of the crimes of Articles 1, 3, 4 and 5 of the Decision 1 as to Defendant A, the crime of unlawful uttering of official document in 2011, the crime of forging private document, the crime of uttering of the above investigation document, and the crime of uttering of the above investigation document are discovered while engaging in speculative business, and the nature of the crime is not easy, such as aiding and abetting the escape of the operator on the ground of the third person and obstructing the investigation. Although the Defendant had already been discovered while engaging in speculative business, he again led to each of the crimes of this case. However, even though the Defendant had already been discovered while engaging in speculative business, he was committed again, he was at a disadvantage to the Defendant. However, even if the Defendant recognized each of the crimes of this case as well as the violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act, the equity should be considered with the case where he was tried together with the crime of violation of the Act on the Promotion of Game Industry for which the judgment became final, other conditions of punishment and arguments expressed in various records and arguments.