The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant, misunderstanding the legal doctrine, delegated the authority to dispose of the instant apartment complex H35 square meters in Suwon-si, Suwon-si, which was executed by the Veterans Association of the Republic of Korea (hereinafter “The Veterans Association”) by the Defendant, with the authority to dispose of the said apartment complex (hereinafter “the instant apartment complex”).

As such, F made the instant apartment sale contract with F and the sales agency contract, and delegated it to F so that it can sell the instant apartment. Accordingly, F made the instant apartment sale transaction with the victim G.

The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case is erroneous by misapprehending the legal principles or misconceptions of facts, although the defendant did not have any fact that he did not know the victim, there is no fact that he participated in deception, and the criminal intent

B. The sentence sentenced by the court below to the defendant (4 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Comprehensively taking account of the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s duly adopted and investigated evidence, it is recognized that the Defendant, by deceiving the victim that the Defendant sold the apartment of this case at a discount, obtained a delivery of KRW 90 million as a down payment and acquired it by deceit. Therefore, the Defendant’s mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal doctrine cannot be accepted.

1) The aggrieved party was introduced by the F Director of the Korea Veterans Association through E (hereinafter “D”), and the F decided to accept from D a considerable amount of 200 households of the Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, the Veterans Association owned by the Korea Veterans Association.

H intending to sell 40 million won at a discount of 200 million won per household of 35 square-type apartment units at KRW 800 million, “The sale is intended at a discount of 90 million per unit shall be made by paying to F the amount of KRW 90 million as a down payment, and entered into a sales contract with D (Evidence Nos. 12 through 20) and received receipts (Evidence No. 22, 44 of the evidence record) in the name of D.

The Defendant made a statement (Evidence No. 380, 148 of the trial record). Although the Defendant made a statement, the Defendant is the victim.