The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, the period of three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and improper sentencing);

A. Fact-misunderstanding 1) The Defendant, as an automatic bond, agreed with the victim D to substitute for the remainder of the purchase price of the forest of this case with the claim of KRW 120 million against the victim D for the existing consulting expenses against the victim D. The Defendant would pay the remainder of KRW 220 million, which is the Defendant’s share in the forest of this case, to receive a loan as security.

There is no fact of deceiving the victim D.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The Defendant’s receipt of each of the KRW 10 million from B and C of a violation of the authorized brokerage law is merely a type of business promotion expenses and various litigation costs in the course of the joint purchase of the land, not a payment made under the pretext of brokerage fees for the instant forest land.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

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

2. Determination

A. The court below rejected the above assertion by stating in detail the defendant's assertion and its decision under the title "the judgment on the defendant's and his defense counsel's assertion" in the judgment of the court below on the grounds of appeal of this case. In light of the above judgment of the court below compared with the records, the judgment of the court below is just and it is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts as alleged by the defendant, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. The instant crime of determining the illegality of sentencing is a matter of interest in the instant forest land without any contribution by the Defendant by deceiving the seller.