The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two months.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (unfair sentencing) of the lower court’s sentence (three months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds of ex officio appeal, the prosecutor applied for amendments to Bill of Indictment to the effect that this Court changed the facts charged in this case as “the modified facts charged” as stated in the following Paragraph (b). Since this Court permitted this, the subject of the judgment was changed, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained any more.

B. The revised facts charged [criminal record] The Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for a period of three years and three months in the Gangnam Branch of the Chuncheon District Court on May 26, 2016, for occupational embezzlement, etc., and the same year.

8.26. The above judgment became final and conclusive.

[2] The Defendant is a person who had worked as the head of the management department in the D Association located in Gangseo-si, Gangnam-si, from January 2, 2008, and the said Association receives KRW 2,00,000 per member E business operators and receives KRW 2,00,000 per member E business operators and conducts various administrative affairs related to E business, such as transfer and renewal of the domicile of E business permission, transfer of the name of permission, etc.

On April 21, 2015, the Defendant made a false statement to the victim G engaged in F in the coffee shop where it is impossible to know the trade name located in Gangseo-do, Gangwon-do. “The right to permit the E business under the name of H, a member of the said Association, has been secured, will be sold.”

However, in fact, the Defendant received a request from the above H to transfer his business license under the H’s name, and did not have a legitimate authority to sell the documents related to the transfer of license. At the time, as in this case, the Defendant: (a) arbitrarily sold the right to permit the transfer of the name from the members of the Association; and (b) purchased another right to permit the transfer of the name from the members of the Association and transferred the same in the name of the member; and (c) transferred another right to permit the transfer of the name under the said member’s name.

The defendant deceivings the victim and is under his control.