A. The court below found the defendant guilty of all of the crimes of this case in spite of the lack of awareness that the defendant altered the lease contract at the time of each crime of this case due to old-age dementia or exercised a modified contract. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts.

B. At the time of committing each of the instant crimes, the Defendant was in a state of mental disorder due to old dementia.

C. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. The court below made a statement to the effect that "the monthly rent is adjusted on February 28, 2012, and the amount shall be determined at KRW 400,000,00,000," which is acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as follows: (a) under the investigation by the police, the defendant was under the investigation by the police; and (b) the defendant made a statement to the effect that "the monthly rent is stipulated in a special agreement with the lessee, which shall be determined as KRW 40,000,00,000," and later, the defendant made two copies of the lease agreement using the same thing two times; and (c) the defendant made two copies of the lease agreement using the same thing that was written by the defendant, which was written with the special agreement, did not appear to have been forgotten; and (d) the witness C of the court below stated that "the defendant had the intention of the defendant demanding the increase in the monthly rent." In full view of the above, the defendant stated that the defendant was not aware of his each act of this case at the elderly.

B. The evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court regarding the assertion of the defectiveness.