A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

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

The fact-finding victim claimed that the defendant paid the money to the defendant as the down payment and the remainder of the contract for the purchase and sale of the Australia apartment (F, hereinafter “the apartment of this case”) is only the return of the money that the defendant left to the victim. The land located in K at the time when the victim, who is the victim claiming that the victim was paid the intermediate payment, and the land located in the N at the time when M was made under the name of the victim (hereinafter “the land of this case”) was returned to the defendant under the name of the victim’s children.

Therefore, the defendant did not make a transfer registration of ownership of the apartment of this case because he did not receive the purchase price from the victim, and the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the above money and land without deceiving the victim, is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts.

The sentence of imprisonment (two years of imprisonment) imposed by the court below on the defendant is too unreasonable.

The lower court’s determination on the assertion of mistake of facts states the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court: (i) the Defendant, around 2006, was liable for debt KRW 20 billion due to the difficulty in constructing a rental apartment construction project; and (ii) the Defendant’s receipts prepared by the Defendant wife I clearly received KRW 150,000,00 as part of the purchase price of the instant apartment; and (iii) there is no evidence supporting the Defendant’s return or borrowing of the said receipts; and (iv) the Defendant’s failure to believe that it is inconsistent; and (v) the Defendant’s existing investment relationship was organized and received compensation.