The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles does not indicate that the Defendant expressed his/her intent to purchase the land indicated in the facts charged. On the other hand, the Defendant only prepared a sales contract stating that the Defendant would purchase the said real estate from the victim in the form of a request by K andO, with the need to provide security for the deposited money that he/she would pay from J, a corporation, and that the Defendant would formally purchase the said real estate from the victim. The Defendant did not have deceiving the victim as stated

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby finding the Defendant guilty of the facts charged.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (ten months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court and the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court as to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles: (i) the statement made by the victim G investigation agency is consistent with the facts charged; (ii) the Defendant and the victim coincide with the content of the sales contract concerning the instant land concluded on March 30, 2015; (iii) the Defendant, while entering into the above sales contract, prepared a statement of performance to the effect that “where the contract is rescinded, the mortgage creation shall also be cancelled if the collateral security is established without compensation; (iv) the statement made at L, K’s investigation agency or this court at the time of the conclusion of the above sales contract and the statement made by the victim G is supported by the victim G’s statement; and (iv) the Defendant recognized all the facts charged in the lower court, taking into account the above circumstances, it is difficult to believe that the Defendant made a false confession for the same reason as the argument.