The punishment of the accused shall be determined by a year of imprisonment.

(2) the date of this judgment.

A. As to where a road is to be constructed anywhere in the course of entering into a sales contract on the instant land by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles, the intent between the Defendant and the victim was unreasonable or there was an error in motive, and the Defendant would construct a road that does not infringe on the instant land by the victim.

There is no deception for the damaged person.

In addition, at the time of the sales contract for the land of this case, the defendant was sufficiently able to perform the remaining contractual terms.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court of this case as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, the defendant, as stated in the court below, has an intention to open a road within the land of this case at the time of concluding a sales contract for the land of this case, but the victim does not violate the land of this case and opened a road adjacent to the land of this case.

The victim seems to have been deceivingd.

We do not accept the Defendant’s factual mistake or misapprehension of legal principles.

B. After the judgment of the court below, the Defendant made efforts to recover the damage of the victim by depositing KRW 60 million and delayed damages of KRW 26,692,701, which were ordered to pay in the civil judgment in relation to the instant sales contract, and expressed the intent that the victim does not want to be punished by the Defendant by agreement with the victim.

The defendant seems to be old and healthy.

In addition, in full view of the records of this case and the sentencing conditions shown in the theory of changes, such as the character and conduct, the environment, the motive and background of the crime, and the circumstances after the crime, the sentence of the court below against the defendant is too unreasonable.

The defendant's argument of sentencing is reasonable.

3.