A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case, misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, although the Defendant had no intention to commit fraud at the time of entering into each sub-lease contract of this case, and had the intent and ability to repay the deposit for sub-lease

B. The punishment of the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances, which are acknowledged by the lower court’s judgment and the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below’s determination as to the assertion of misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles, namely, the term of the building of this case was scheduled to expire on March 1, 2016, and the Defendant was notified by E management body of the refusal to renew the lease of this case on or around January 20, 2016, and the Defendant was subject to compulsory disposition due to the illegal structural change of the building of this case from May 21, 2014, but did not notify the lessee of this fact. Nevertheless, the Defendant failed to present the lease contract concluded between E at the time of entering into each sub-lease contract of this case; the Defendant borrowed KRW 50 million from the date of December 31, 2010, and paid the construction price of the building of this case to E as the deposit money for the building of this case, and the Defendant was also aware that there was no error in the misapprehension or alteration of the legal principles as to the property of this case or the sub-lease.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's person.