The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles did not deceiving the victim, and the victim paid KRW 20 million to the defendant in order to repay his/her obligation to the defendant and transferred his/her ownership to three bonds.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The court below denied the charges of this case by asserting that the defendant's mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles are similar to the trial. However, the court below denied the charges of this case, i.e., (1) the victim's statement is reliable, (2) the defendant and the defendant's de facto spouse, N, a de facto spouse, did not secure the ownership of the officetel of this case, and the victim could not move into the above officetel, (3) the defendant did not pay 285 million won of the purchase price for the three bonds of this case within the deadline, and (4) the defendant intentionally failed to recover the damage caused by the separate fraud at the time of the crime of this case, etc., and (5) the defendant did not submit the charges of this case under the pretext of his intention to purchase the house of this case on the ground that it was not consistent with the argument of the defendant's intention to purchase the house of this case and the expenses of this case on the ground that it was hard to obtain the house of this case from the victim, but it did not comply with the argument that the defendant's intent to purchase the house of this case.