All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant, with the consent of E, written the number and letter of KRW 100 million on the lease contract, is erroneous in the judgment of the court below.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below is too uneasible and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. On June 20, 201, the Defendant asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal by the lower court. On June 20, 201, the lower court: (a) sold the Defendant’s apartment 103 Dong 401, 170 million won owned by the Defendant to the Victim E; (b) paid the Defendant a cash of KRW 50 million with the purchase price; and (c) paid KRW 130 million in total by acquiring the collateral obligation against the right to collateral security established on the said apartment; and (d) leased the said apartment 40 million in total to the Defendant with the lease deposit of KRW 40 million with the remainder of KRW 40 million with the lease deposit as of June 22, 2011; and (c) subsequently, the said Defendant, without the consent of the said victim, found the Defendant guilty of the lease deposit of KRW 100 million with the agreement of KRW 400,000,000 on September 27, 2011.

The following circumstances acknowledged by the court below based on the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, namely, E’s consistent statement and the Defendant denied the fact that the documents were written by an investigative agency, and the prosecutor’s office stated that the documents were mixed with several fences different from the previous parts.

I explained that he had obtained the consent of E in the court of the court below.

In light of the fact that there is no consistency in the statements, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable.