The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts), even if the facts charged of this case were fully convicted, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts, thereby rendering a judgment of not guilty of the facts charged of this case.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant, who was the former representative director of the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) of the summary of the facts charged, was under dispute with G, the present representative director, and the Defendant’s wife H, on June 19, 2014, decided to grant permission for convening a temporary general meeting of shareholders (number: 2014 non-conforming 7) for the purpose of “retirement (retirement) and appointment of a director from a certified judicial scrivener office located on the fourth floor of the 19th, 2014, in the previous Jeju District Court around the Jeonsan-gu, 17:00, the Defendant’s voting right was restricted.

Therefore, while the representative director G of the company of this case was present at the above general meeting on the above day, the attendance of 1/3 of the total shareholders and the consent of 2/3 of the participants shall be required in order to dismiss the executive of the above general meeting. As the voting rights are limited, the defendant is dismissed as he did not satisfy the voting rights of 2/3 as he did not meet the voting rights of 2/3 in relation to the agenda on the dismissal of the representative director G, and the provisional general meeting of shareholders was terminated.

Nevertheless, the defendant at around 17:08 on the same day, in order to dismiss the above G, he again held a temporary general meeting of shareholders using the above G to leave the above JJ office, and prepared a copy of the temporary general meeting of shareholders in H under the name of H who is not eligible to be the chairperson of the general meeting of shareholders, and he thought that H was elected to the representative director of the above company and that the above G was dismissed.

(1) On July 10, 2014, the Defendant prepared a copy of a temporary general meeting of shareholders (A) on the preparation of a private document, at the above JAD office around July 17:20, 2014, held a temporary general meeting of shareholders at the meeting room of 17:00, 3 shareholders, total number of shares issued, 50,000 shares, in the letter of a temporary general meeting of shareholders.