A. At the time of the instant case, the Defendant: (a) was unaware of the circumstances that J or F, at the time of the instant case, entered the Defendant’s name in the lease agreement and affixed the seal; and (b) did not allow F to render brokerage services by entering the Defendant’s name and affixing the seal; (c) the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case, in so determining of facts, that the judgment

B. The lower court’s sentence of an unreasonable sentencing (two million won of fine) against the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The judgment of the court below also asserted the same purport as this part of the grounds for appeal. The court below held that the defendant asserted the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, i.e., F is a broker assistant of the D Licensed Real Estate Agent Office, and F did not receive instructions from the defendant who is a licensed real estate agent, or did not report to the defendant in carrying out studio brokerage business, and the defendant was placed in the F in his office so that F could prepare a lease contract under the name of the defendant, and F did not take part in the defendant while arranging a lease contract between G and H, and it stated that F did not take part in the defendant's name while arranging the lease contract between G and H (the original court statement), ② since the D Licensed Real Estate Agent Office did not have a licensed real estate agent office, the defendant and the licensed real estate agent office were operated with the defendant, and the defendant was prepared under the name of the defendant's office that was kept under the permission of the defendant (the original court statement).