The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty of 65 million won, which the victim E (hereinafter "victim E"), received from the victim E ("victim E") as the purchase price, not the loan in the name of relocation expenses, and there was no deception of the victim company, and even if the victim did not have the intent to acquire it, there was an error of law by mistake of facts

B. The sentence of unfair sentencing (six months of imprisonment) by the lower court is excessively unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Regarding the assertion of mistake of facts, the court below found the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly examined and adopted by the court below, i.e., (i) if the defendant sold 202 house in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government to the victim company and received 65 million won as the price, as alleged by the defendant, the above 202 procedure was initiated and sold to others. As such, it is general to raise an issue about the purchaser company's disposal of the secured debt, which is the cause of commencement of the above voluntary auction, but there is no trace of such an issue, and rather, it appears that the defendant would pay money to the F who is the operator of the victim company (Evidence 24 pages), and (ii) the defense counsel argued that the defendant prepared a rental contract, not a sales contract, to keep the victim company secret with other union members, and that the defendant prepared the above 202 house rental contract with the victim's agreement on July 3, 2012 (Evidence 2006.36,500).