The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Error 1) In regard to fraud, it is true that the Defendant: (a) delegated all the matters regarding the conclusion of a lease agreement to a licensed real estate agent office; (b) did not deceiving the victim; and (c) at the time, there was sufficient sufficient means to refund the lease deposit; (b) the Defendant’s deception by deceiving the victim and did not receive the lease deposit; (c) on November 27, 2007, with respect to the evasion of compulsory execution, the mortgage established against H on the multi-family house located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government I (hereinafter “instant building”); and (d) the Defendant transferred the registration of ownership transfer to H with intent to escape compulsory execution from the creditors on July 15, 2008.

However, on November 27, 2007, since the defendant's financial ability was sufficient at the time of establishing a false collateral security, there was no risk of undermining the creditor at that time.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court on the Defendant (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant.

In the trial court, the prosecutor applied for a change in the indictment to the effect that the contents of the deception are changed with respect to the fraud among the facts charged in this case, and the subject of the judgment was changed by this court.

However, the lower court rendered a single sentence on the grounds that the changed conviction and the remaining conviction are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and thus, the entire lower judgment was no longer maintained.

However, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to a trial by this court, despite the above reasons for reversal of facts.

3. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The court below acknowledged the fraud based on the evidence duly adopted and examined.