However, the prosecutor asserted that there was an error of misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as to the non-guilty portion of the judgment of the court below through the statement of reasons for appeal submitted within the deadline, and did not make any prior argument as to the sentencing of violation of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name, which is the remaining conviction portion, and then examined the non-guilty portion and the part in violation of the Act on the Registration

2. Determination as to the non-fixed part

A. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant filed a complaint with B and E with the false fact that "B and E, by forging a real estate sales contract under the name of the defendant, acquired a loan secured by the apartment, thereby causing punishment to be punished." However, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the crime of false mistake and omission of facts, and in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the crime of false accusation, although it is reasonable to view that the defendant filed a complaint with B and E, in full view of the following circumstances: (a) the defendant was accompanied by B and Busan to obtain a loan secured by the apartment in this case; (b) the tenant was not present in this case; and (c) the defendant was paid the compensation for the name loan of the apartment in this case, such as a lease contract certificate; and (d) the defendant took part in the act of fraud of the apartment house B and E; and (c) the defendant filed

B. (1) The summary B and E of this part of the facts charged shall be selected by the lessee’s apartment.