The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant;

A. Although there is a fact that the Defendant received a request from the victim for a bridge design and civil engineering design and completed it, there is no promise to grant a permission for the installation of a bridge.

The forest land in the Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, the ownership of which was transferred by the Defendant (hereinafter “the forest in this case”) is almost valuable because it is not a bridge for connection. The forest land in this case is in fact 2,000 square meters (the forest in this case is 6,611.6/26,021 out of the forest in this case, but the forest in this case is 2,000 square meters for convenience) that the officially announced value is merely 2.8 million won.

B. The sentence of the judgment of the court below on unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the grounds for appeal by the defendant

A. Determination of the assertion of mistake of facts (1) As alleged by the Defendant, the Defendant is not entitled to permit the construction of the instant bridge, and thus, it cannot be directly granted permission for the construction of the bridge.

However, the following facts are acknowledged according to the records of this case: (a) the defendant, who is the husband of the victim and the complainant, proposed to install a bridge in the forest of this case and obtain permission first, and proposed to E to prepare all documents necessary to permit the installation of a bridge (Evidence No. 193 pages, etc.); (b) the defendant consistently agreed to grant permission for the installation of a bridge; (c) the defendant transferred 2,000 out of the forest of this case to the defendant at his own expense; and (c) the statement is not particularly inconsistent with the defendant's assertion that the forest of this case should not be installed. According to the defendant's assertion, the forest of this case is expected to increase the value of the forest of this case, and the defendant received 2,000 square meters in return for the civil engineering design, etc. among the forest of this case; and (d) the civil engineering design and the design of a bridge must be constructed as a matter of course on the premise that the forest of this case will be constructed.