The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that a lease agreement on the housing on the ground of Yongsan-gu Seoul Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government is concluded under the direction of J, and the defendant is not involved in it, and even if not,

Even if he was delegated by E, the owner of the house, and entered into a lease contract with the victim, so the defendant deceivings the victim as stated in the facts charged.

subsection (b) of this section.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal, the defendant was prosecuted on the charge of forging a private document, etc. and was sentenced to a two-year conviction by the court of first instance [Seoul Western District Court 2013 High Court 1241, 1766, 2014 High Court 426, 426 (Joint)] on October 22, 2014. The defendant appealed, and the appellate court (Seoul Western District Court 2014No 1409) rendered a judgment of acquittal of the defendant on April 9, 2015. The defendant and the prosecutor were on the part of the facts charged, but both appeals were dismissed on December 10 of the same year and the judgment became final and conclusive.

However, since the crime of the judgment of the court below and the crime of forging private documents against the defendant for which the judgment of the court below became final and conclusive, in relation to the concurrent crimes of the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, a punishment for the crime of the judgment of the court below should be imposed in consideration of equity with the case where the judgment of the court below is rendered at the same time in accordance with the main sentence of Article

B. However, despite the above reasons for reversal ex officio, the defendant's assertion of mistake falls within the scope of the judgment of this court, and this is examined.

When considering the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below, in particular, the fact that the defendant prepared a charter agreement under the name of E with the victim without obtaining permission of E in the above final judgment and found the defendant guilty of its exercise, the defendant can fully recognize the fact that the defendant deceivings the victim as stated in the judgment of the court below.