The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of the lower court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of legal principles (the part concerning the fabrication of private documents and the uttering of a falsified investigation document in 2018DaDa3584): The Defendant arbitrarily prepared the subscription form of the company bonds with the intent to acquire money by deceiving K, and let K enter the name, etc. in the subscription form of the company bonds. Even if there was an intent to subscribe the company bonds to K, it is difficult to deem that the subscription form of the company bonds is included in the intent to enter the name, etc. in the false subscription form of the company bonds forged. Therefore, even if the above subscription form of the company bonds was prepared against the intention of K, and the Defendant was recognized to have forged and used the subscription form of the company bonds under the name of K, the lower court erred by misapprehending legal principles, which acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged. 2) In so doing, the lower

2. Determination

A. An ex officio determination prosecutor shall be conducted in the first instance trial and shall maintain, in the first instance, the facts charged as to the fabrication of a private document and the uttering of a private document on K’s corporate bonds among the facts charged of the instant case’s order 2018 high group3584.

1 As stated in Paragraph 1, an application for permission to amend the Bill of Indictment was filed with the content that the application was forged for private documents concerning the subscription form of the company under the name of AL representative director BD and AM and that the exercise of the above-mentioned documents was added to the subject of the judgment.

However, as examined below, inasmuch as the court found the forgery of a private document and the uttering of a private document on the subscription form of K under the name of this part, which is the primary facts charged, not guilty as shown in the judgment below, and found the Defendant guilty of forging a private document and the uttering of a private document on the subscription form of K under the name of AL representative director BD, AM, which is the ancillary facts charged, the judgment of the court below that only is the primary facts charged, may be maintained.