A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

A. In light of the fact that the victim of misunderstanding of facts first proposed that he would pay KRW 130 million to the defendant, and that the defendant paid interest to the victim for about two years according to the agreement, etc., the defendant did not have the criminal intent to receive and obtain the above money only without performing the business transfer in accordance with the agreement from the time of receiving KRW 130 million from the victim around August 10, 2009 to the time of receiving KRW 130 million.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, which erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The Defendant’s imprisonment of eight months sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances, which can be recognized by the lower court based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant could recognize the fact that the Defendant, even if the Defendant did not intend to transfer the business regarding “E”, by deceiving the victim as if he were to transfer it, and by deceiving the victim with payment of KRW 130 million.

(A) As seen below, unlike the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant appears to have first requested the return of the premium to the victim, even if the victim first proposed such proposal, and even if the Defendant paid the agreed interest during one-time period, it does not change). On June 9, 1996, while the Plaintiff leased the store located in Seongdong-gu Seoul (hereinafter “instant store”) from his father and operated his clothes, he transferred the right of lease with KRW 100,000 won for the premium from the Defendant, and the Defendant began to be “E” business (hereinafter “G trade name”) at the instant store.

The victim received the instant store from his father around July 18, 2002, and around August 1, 2004, the victim received the instant store from his father, and only 30 million won premium from the defendant on August 1, 2004.