The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The Defendant is a construction business operator who built the studio-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City Co., Ltd. from June 2017 to March 2018, which is the victim B, from June 2017 to March 2018.

On March 26, 2018, the Defendant, using a computer in the column for the location of the real estate (multi-family house) lease contract, entered the column for the location of the real estate (multi-family house) lease contract into the column for the deposit money, entered the column for the deposit into the “one hundred and twenty million won ( 182,50,000),” and printed in the column for the lessor’s column, the Defendant’s seal was affixed to B’s prior seal.

For the purpose of exercising, the Defendant forged one copy of the real estate lease contract in the name of private document B, which is a private document on rights and obligations.

The Defendant, “2019 Highest 441,” is a construction business entity that has built the studio C in the Seocho-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City from June 2017 to March 2018, which is owned by B.

On March 26, 2018, the Defendant entered the title “C4 of the construction defect performance angle” on the paper A4 using a computer at a closed location below the front city (hereinafter referred to as the “Seoul Special Self-Governing City”) and followed, the Defendant entered the title “C” and “B” written at the bottom of the said document stating, “The construction manager in charge of the construction of the building at the front city (hereinafter referred to as the “Seoul Special Self-Governing City”) shall be promptly performed at the time when the owner is informed of the defect within one year (12 months) from the date on which the initial approval for the use of the building was granted.” As described in the contract (B), the Defendant entered the performance of the defect in the building as a substitute for each of the above, thereby faithfully implementing the mutual trust.”

For the purpose of uttering, the Defendant forged one copy of a construction defect performance certificate in the name of private document B, which is a private document on rights and obligations.

2. In full view of the following circumstances revealed through the records of the instant case, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone is excluded from a reasonable doubt that the Defendant forged each of the instant documents.