The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (eight months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the Defendant recognized all of the facts charged in this case and reflected, and it is recognized that each of the crimes in this case committed on April 1, 2017, which became final and conclusive by the judgment of the court below, is in the relation of concurrent crimes with the crime of violation of the Act of the first head of the crime stated in the judgment of the court below, and the relationship of concurrent crimes after Article 37 of

However, the defendant is highly likely to be selected as residents in comparison with the general consumers in the case of an apartment building constructed at a location with a good location. The defendant applied for the sale of the apartment after lending the name of the state meritorious and disabled who failed to apply for the sale of the apartment due to lack of economic capacity. The above crime is an act of impairing the fairness of the selection process of winners in the new apartment sale process by abusing a special sale system for the persons of distinguished service to the State, undermining the fairness of the selection process in the new apartment sale process, undermining bona fide users of the State, undermining the real estate speculation, undermining the housing supply system, undermining the order of housing supply, and undermining the real estate speculation, and undermining the order of housing supply, there is a need to eradicate it through strict punishment. The defendant was led to the crime, under which some of the crimes in this case were committed during the aggravated period, and the defendant was punished several times, and the defendant's age, age of the defendant's age, circumstances, records, circumstances, circumstances, etc. after the judgment of the court below, and the sentencing of this case.

It is assessed or maintained as it is.