The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

According to the summary of the grounds for appeal submitted by the prosecutor, although the defendant can be found to have forged documents under the name of E (hereinafter “E”) as stated in the facts charged in the instant case and used them by entering false facts in the notarial deed, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of the facts charged in the instant case, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Judgment

The court below held as follows: ① the husband of the E representative director, and the husband of the E representative director, who actually operates E, stated that “us will run the aggregate business, and our loan KRW 500 million,” and that when a notarial deed as stated in paragraph (1) of the facts charged of this case (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) was prepared, D borrowed money from the Defendant under the name of the above partnership company was about KRW 450 million, and ② as D demanded D to provide security for the above loan, D would bring about a certificate of personal seal impression and corporate seal impression issued on the date of preparation of the notarial deed of this case, and written the notarial deed of this case (hereinafter “the notarial deed of this case”), ③ it is difficult to acknowledge that D was not guilty of the facts charged of this case by entering the notarial deed of this case in the name of the Defendant after preparing the notarial deed of this case, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that D was not guilty of the notarial deed of this case.