The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts 1) The Defendant is a foreign exchange equalization fund claim (hereinafter “foreign exchange equalization fund”) against G.

2) There was no fact that the Defendant issued and exercised 20,000 copies of counterfeited industrial finance bonds and 100 copies of forged industrial finance bonds. 2) There was no fact that the Defendant had exercised 10 U.S. dollars 201 forged to J.

(The defendant has withdrawn his assertion of misunderstanding of facts as to the forgery of securities and the fraud on the fourth trial date.

Even if all of the facts charged in the instant case are found guilty, the lower court’s imprisonment (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, and the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the exercise of forged debt and industrial finance bonds, in particular, the statement in the statement about G and various circumstances supporting this, the fact that the defendant has the forged debt and industrial finance bonds, as stated in the facts constituting a crime in the original judgment, can be acknowledged to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt about the fact that he had exercised such credit and industrial finance bonds. (1) When the court below adopted G as a witness and tried two cell phone numbers of G which appear on the record but it was impossible to serve the summons continuously, but he attempted to call with the two cell phone numbers of G which appear on the record, and made efforts to request G to find three times or more times due to his domicile and his domicile at the time when the judgment was rendered, and thus, it constitutes “when a statement cannot be made due to the unknown whereabouts or any other similar cause on the date of trial” as prescribed in Article 314 of the Criminal Procedure Act. ② G police officer’s charge constitutes a forgery of KRW 500 million and five billion won (one billion won).