The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the fact that the lease contract entered into with the victim E was not based on the premise of the transfer of possession, and it is unclear whether the victim changed the entrance door locking system from December 2, 2009 to December 2, 2009, the defendant transferred possession of the key under 201 and 405 to the defendant.

Therefore, even though the victim did not possess 201 and 405 because of the waiver of the right of lease, the judgment of the court below which found the guilty of the facts charged in this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, and 80 hours of community service order) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) Determination on the assertion of mistake of fact does not necessarily mean that the possession by another person subject to protection in the obstruction of the exercise of rights in the relevant legal doctrine does not necessarily mean the possession based on the title to be occupied. On the other hand, according to the facts admitted by the lower court and the evidence duly adopted and examined by the trial court, the following facts are acknowledged: (a) possession where possession was commenced based on legitimate title but the possession was lost thereafter; (b) possession until the existence of title is clarified through the legal procedure; and (c) possession that may oppose simultaneous performance defenses, etc., even though the existence of title was not discovered through the legal procedure; and (d) possession that may oppose the dispute resolution through the legal procedure (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Do4455, Mar. 23, 2006).

A) The Defendant around November 19, 2008 (hereinafter “NLA”) is a mid-term corporation of the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “NLA”).

A) Between the Defendant and the Eunpyeong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Ground Building (hereinafter “instant Building”).

B The construction contract was concluded to remodel B with the cost of construction of KRW 240,000,000, and it was awarded a contract.