The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

except that, for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal: mistake of facts and unreasonable sentencing;

A. Defendant 1) The summary of the assertion of mistake of facts is as follows: (a) at the time when the Defendant prepared a sale and purchase contract of a plot of land (land) with the victim H through G on September 2016 and received KRW 31,400,000 from the victim as the proceeds of the sale and purchase contract; (b) the Defendant and the landowner continued to have a valid Dong business contract; and (c) the Defendant cannot be said to have acquired the proceeds of the sale and purchase by deceiving the victim. Therefore, the lower court’s judgment convicting the Defendant on the premise that the Defendant could not be deemed to have committed a crime by deception. (b) In so determining, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the assertion of unfair sentencing (one year

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the facts and circumstances found by the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court’s determination that recognized the Defendant’s deception by deceiving the victim H to obtain 31,400,000 won from the victim as the proceeds of the sales contract is justifiable, and it did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine as otherwise alleged by the Defendant.

B. The Defendant committed a crime of forging each of the instant private documents and uttering of a falsified document on a multiple occasions, with the judgment on the assertion of unfair sentencing by the Defendant and the prosecutor.

There is a record that the defendant has been punished for a crime of attempted fraud in 1986.

Considering these circumstances, it is necessary to strictly punish the defendant.

However, all of the crimes of forging each private document of this case and uttering of a falsified document of this case are recognized, and are in violation of depth, and the defendant has received a letter from the victim of the crime of fraud of this case and reached an agreement with the holder of each of the crimes of forging and uttering of a falsified private document of this case.