The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

All the costs of the original judgment and the trial shall be borne by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant used the expression "right to claim" in the statement of grounds for appeal that is equivalent to KRW 300 million from H who occupied real estate, such as Pyeongtaek-si D land, and the Defendant appears to mean the secured claim of the right of retention. The Defendant acquired the above real estate, and even performed construction works equivalent to KRW 36 million in the said real estate. The Defendant reported the right of KRW 336 million in the case of the International Auction of Suwon District Court of Suwon District, rather than reporting the right of retention (the right of claims and the right of possession of real estate), but only reported the right of claims of the right of retention based on facts, which is justifiable.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case on the ground that the defendant interfered with the auction of the above real estate by reporting the false lien, was erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (three million won of fine) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

A. According to each evidence duly admitted and investigated by the court below, the following facts can be acknowledged.

1) C) Buildings, such as Pyeongtaek-si D, E, F, G land, its ground factories, houses, etc. (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant real estate”).

(2) Around July 7, 2011, as the owner of the instant real estate, offered the said real estate as security and received a loan from the Industrial Bank of Korea. Around July 7, 201, C entered into a sales contract with H to sell the instant real estate and its interior appliances, machinery, etc. to H for KRW 1.05 billion. Around that time, H began occupying the said factory. However, H did not properly perform the said sales contract and thus, H did not transfer the ownership of the said real estate to H.

3..