The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. The decision of the court below (one year and six months of imprisonment) against the defendant on the summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) is too unreasonable.

2. The crime of this case is not good in light of the criminal law of this case, such as acquiring money by deceiving a victim who is imminent in legal dispute while working as an attorney-at-law in charge of another person's legal affairs and using the court's decision to conceal it. Thus, a sentence of imprisonment with prison labor is inevitable for the defendant.

However, the amount of fraud in this case is not so big, and the defendant paid KRW 16 million to the victim for the recovery of damage, the defendant's act does not constitute a separate criminal punishment in addition to a fine imposed due to a violation of the Road Traffic Act (driving) in 2004, the confession and reflects the crime, and the forgery of official documents, etc. (the court below considered the forgery of official documents, etc. as a type 2 (business or organizational) in the application of the sentencing guidelines, but the term "business or organizational structure" here means the case where the defendant has an organization, such as the act of forgery or alteration as a business or the act of arranging head, arrangement, and delivery of books, etc., so the defendant's act does not constitute such act).

In addition, considering the various circumstances, such as the defendant's age, sex and environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, etc., the court below's punishment is too unreasonable since it is too unreasonable. Thus, the defendant's argument is reasonable.

3. If so, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided after pleading as follows.

Criminal facts

Except as otherwise expressly stated in Section 1-B of the lower judgment’s summary of the facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment, the phrase “the end of December 1, 2016” in Section 1 is as “the end of December 2015,” and is written in each corresponding column of the lower judgment.