The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. As to the Defendant’s assertion of unfair sentencing, the Defendant’s error is against his own mistake, the judgment ordering the cancellation of the registration of transfer of the land ownership of this case becomes final and conclusive in the related civil procedure, and the Defendant did not have any economic damage due to the loss of land ownership to D, and the Defendant has no record of criminal punishment for the same kind of crime, etc. However, the lower court appears to have sufficiently taken such favorable circumstances into account in sentencing, and there is no change in circumstances to mitigate it again at the trial, and it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s participation in the process of the instant crime is less minor in the course of the instant crime to dispose of the instant land to G Co., Ltd., the Defendant committed again the instant crime without being aware of the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, family environment, motive, means, method, and consequence leading up to the instant crime, and the circumstances before and after the instant crime, etc., it cannot be deemed that the lower court’s punishment (a prison term of June 2, 200) is inappropriate and unreasonable in consideration of all the sentencing conditions indicated in the instant records and pleadings.

2. As such, the defendant's appeal is without merit and it is dismissed under Article 364 (4) of the Criminal Procedure Act since it is clear that the defendant's appeal is a clerical error in each case's imprisonment decision" under Article 228 (1), Article 30 of the Criminal Act, Articles 229, 228 (1), and 30 of the Criminal Act, Article 25 (1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure, since the defendant's appeal is clearly correct ex officio pursuant to Article 25 (1) of the Regulations on Criminal Procedure, among the provisions of the law of the court below, Article 228 (1), Article 229 of the Criminal Act, Article 228 (1), and Article 228 (1) of the Criminal Act.