2. The purpose of adopting the judgment apartment system is to stabilize the housing of the homeless people, and it is practically prohibited that the Government makes a rental business operator pay taxes, such as lending the National Housing Fund, etc. to the homeless people with long-term low interest, and the transfer of the right of lease is, in principle, prohibited. Nevertheless, the Defendant’s act of mediating the transfer of the right of lease as a real estate broker, such as the crime in this case, is to transfer the constructed rental housing as an object of speculation to ensure the stability of the homeless ordinary people’s residential life, and interferes with the creation of the residence of the homeless ordinary people, and there is a heavy burden for such crime, and the Defendant’s profit acquired by the crime in this case is also significant, and considering all the circumstances that are conditions for sentencing such as the motive, circumstance, means, and method of the crime in this case. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion cannot be accepted.

3. Accordingly, the defendant's appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the grounds that the defendant's appeal is groundless. It is so decided as per Disposition.