The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The crime related to resale of the right to sell real estate, such as this case, leads to the encouragement of real estate speculation, inducing the increase of housing prices, and ultimately, undermining the housing stability of ordinary people who need the real occupancy.

The crimes prosecuted by the defendant for the crime of arranging the right to sell in lots are 100 cases and the number of times is considerably high.

The defendant distributed investigation manuals and false statements to actively destroy evidence.

However, the defendant secured a person who intends to dispose of the right of sale and a person who intends to purchase it and did not participate in the brokerage business directly.

However, in order to secure the right of a person who wants to purchase the right of sale in the course of the brokerage, the act of notarial affairs of promissory notes has been arranged to facilitate their resale, and the degree of participation in the act of mediation of the defendant is not much important.

The Defendant merely acquired only a part of the notarial expenses and did not take so-called "right of sale", and the profits actually acquired in the course of the instant crime are estimated to be approximately KRW 15 million.

The accused has been aware of his criminal acts from investigative agencies to the court of the first instance, and the accused has committed a mistake.

There is no criminal record for the defendant, and there is no record of punishment heavier than that for suspension of execution after 2005.

In full view of all the conditions of sentencing as shown in the arguments, including these circumstances, including the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and method of the crime, and circumstances after the crime, the sentence imposed by the court below is somewhat inappropriate.

3. As such, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act and the judgment below is ruled as follows, on the ground that the defendant's argument of sentencing is justified.

[Re-use]