The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles believe that the victims would have been able to obtain the right to occupy a commercial building, and they concluded a contract with the victims, so there was no intention to obtain the right to take occupancy in the commercial building, and even with the knowledge that the victim K and M would not have the right to occupy the commercial building, there was no causal relationship between the disposal of the above victims and the deception of the defendant, and there was an intention and ability to repay the price to the victims who would not have the right to occupy the commercial building.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (two years of suspended sentence in six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The part of the court below's assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles that can be recognized by comprehensively considering the evidence legitimately adopted and investigated, that is, ① the right to sell commercial buildings or the right to sell land for countermeasures against life is paid to the persons related to farming and livestock industry, and in this case, it is paid to the persons who actually engaged in farming or livestock industry within the pertinent business district since before the date of public inspection on October 209, and ② the defendant sold the plastic houses to the victims as the date of each of the facts charged in this case, which is the prior public inspection public announcement date, under which they can receive the right to sell commercial buildings as the compensation for their livelihood, and ③ the victims agreed to have the victims receive the right to sell commercial buildings directly to receive the right to sell commercial buildings, but the defendant agreed to have the victims receive the compensation for their livelihood without the direct payment of the victims (see, e.g., trial record, 60 pages, 65 pages, 71 pages, 72 pages, and 83).