A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and four months.

A. Taking into account the following circumstances: (a) the degree of participation of the Defendant in charge of soliciting the public prosecutor’s false lessee; (b) the amount of defraudation of this case reaches KRW 183,00,000; (c) the frequency of the crime reaches three times; (d) the amount of punishment for the same kind of crime; (e) the denial of the crime; and (e) there was no effort to pay for damage; and (e) the punishment for ten months sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant 1) In light of the following circumstances: (a) the Defendant did not attract misunderstanding of facts between C and J as a false lessee; (b) the Defendant reflects unreasonable sentencing; (c) the benefits acquired by the Defendant are merely KRW 3,000,000; and (d) the Defendant deposited KRW 3,000,000 and is working for the repayment of damages, the sentence imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, ① the fact that the defendant testified that he appeared as a witness at the court below and the defendant introduced J and C as a witness [this testimony is admissible if it is proved that the defendant's statement was made under particularly reliable circumstances pursuant to Article 316(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and there is little room to intervene in the fact that "in particular, under reliable circumstances," the above statement was made. It refers to the case where there is a specific and external circumstance that guarantees the credibility or voluntariness of the contents of the statement (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Do8735, Nov. 25, 2010). The defendant did not actively dispute that he did not go through the cross-examination process against D, or the circumstances that the defendant proposed D and D to do so in light of the aforementioned circumstances.