2. The judgment of this Court

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined at the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts are: (a) the defendant requested the seller to sell the commercial building of this case and the commercial building of this case of this case of this case of this case of 33 and 31,32,144, and the defendant did not request the seller to sell the commercial building of this case of this case of this case separately; (b) E's request to sell the commercial building of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this 33; and (c) the defendant requested the buyer to sell the commercial building of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this 10,100 and 30,000,000 won, and there was no error in the misapprehension of facts as to the sale contract of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of 330,

As such, the defendant's argument disputing this issue is rejected.

B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendant committed the instant crime during the period of suspension of execution of the same kind of crime, and comprehensively takes account of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, criminal records, background and motive leading to the crime, means and method of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the lower court’s punishment is too excessive.