The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

A. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts, i.e., violating the reasoning.

In other words, the lower court recognized the criminal facts that the Defendant concluded a sales contract with the victim hiding the fact that the collateral security was established on the Hongcheon-gun G Forest in Gangwon-do (hereinafter “instant land”) which is the object of sale and purchase, and determined the same part of the judgment as to the Defendant’s assertion.

However, in the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion, the lower court notified the victim of the establishment of the right to collateral security on the instant land.

Even if the Defendant found the Defendant guilty on the ground that the Defendant entered into a sales contract without the intent and ability of the victim to complete registration of transfer of ownership without any restriction on registration of establishment of the right to collateral security and received the purchase price, the Defendant would have impliedly cancelled the establishment of the right to collateral security and cancelled the right to collateral security.

The phrase is incompatible.

② The Defendant notified the victim of the establishment of a collateral security on the instant land.

(3) The defendant has no intention to acquire the crime by deception.

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

2. Determination

A. According to the records on the assertion of mistake of facts, the court below held that the defendant notified the victim of the fact that the right to collateral security was established on the land of this case before entering into a sales contract (the change in the court below's assertion that the defendant had no intention to deception). According to the victim's legal statement, etc., according to the victim's legal statement of the court below, the court below is just a case where the defendant notified the victim of the above fact that "the defendant had entered into a sales contract without notifying the fact that the right to collateral security was established and received the balance in order before receiving