The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the prosecutor's appeal and the prosecutor's appeal delivered the defendant a neck to pay interest on the money borrowed by the bank. If the defendant's neck delivery process is the same as the above, the defendant must have obtained the consent of the complainant whenever he prepares the lease contract, but unless otherwise, the defendant's act constitutes a crime of forgery.

Even if it can be seen that the complainant is ex post facto acceptable, it is a matter after the crime of forgery of documents has already been established.

In light of the contents and contents of the contract, the contract shall be deemed to have been forged, but the judgment of the court below acquitted each of the facts charged in this case, which erred by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion

2. Examining the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court in light of the record, the evidence submitted by the prosecutor alone that the Defendant prepared and exercised a lease contract under the name of N with the qualification of N's agent, or exercised it after forging a copy of the lease contract under the name of the complainant.

There is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

To the same effect, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine as alleged by the public prosecutor, as otherwise alleged by the public prosecutor.

3. According to the conclusion, the prosecutor’s appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364(4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the appeal is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.