A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

A. In relation to the fraud of the victim F by mistake of facts, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant of this part of the facts charged, although the defendant did not know the victim about the funeral restaurant or the restaurant, because he did not deceive the victim, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The punishment of the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to judgment on the grounds for ex officio appeal.

According to the records of this case, the Defendant was sentenced to ten months of imprisonment with prison labor on October 20, 2017 for the crime of forging official documents at Sungnam support, Sung-nam branch of Suwon District Court, and the judgment became final and conclusive on April 25, 2018. As such, the Defendant’s each crime of this case and the crime of forging official documents for which the judgment became final and conclusive on April 25, 2018 are concurrent crimes in relation to the crime of forging official documents after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the punishment shall be determined after examining whether to reduce or exempt punishment by taking into account equity in cases where the judgment is simultaneously made pursuant to

Therefore, the judgment of the court below can no longer be maintained.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of the court.

3. The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts: (i) the victim F sent money from E to the lower court for the Defendant’s right to operate the restaurant as the Defendant’s box at the H construction site from the investigative agency to the lower court’s court.

In other words, he heard the statement that he did not call and remitted the sum of KRW 40 million to the Defendant’s account, and thereafter, the Defendant agreed from E on the right to operate the funeral hall, such as L/M, etc., but he would have the right to operate the funeral hall on the face of a week.

In order to hear the horses, to operate a funeral hall together with E, and to use the P account in the name of P.