The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than ten months.

1. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable due to the inherent nature of the grounds for appeal (the Defendant and the defense counsel explicitly withdrawn the assertion of mistake of facts on the second trial date). 2. Determination on the grounds of appeal

A. The former Rental Housing Act (amended by the Special Act on Rental Housing in the Private Sector, Act No. 13499, Aug. 28, 2015) permits rental business entities to transfer their residence to another Si/Gun/Gu for reasons such as work, life or treatment of disease, etc. (Article 1), to establish the standards for the terms and conditions of lease, such as qualifications for lessee, method of selection, deposit money, rent, etc. (Article 20(1)). On the contrary, as an exception to the principle prohibition of transfer and sub-lease of lessee’s right of lease, the former Enforcement Decree of the Rental Housing Act (amended by the Enforcement Decree of the Special Act on Rental Housing in the Private Sector, Presidential Decree No. 26449, Jul. 24, 2015) permits rental business entities to acquire the consent of rental business entities, to acquire the right to lease and sub-lease the rental housing without permission or to obtain the consent of the public by means of fraudulent or other unjust means (Article 19).

The Defendant has already been punished by imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Rental Housing Act on October 7, 2015.