The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact-finding defendant performed the housing remodeling work of this case by giving orders, but it was difficult to complete the construction work at the original contract amount due to the deterioration of the house. Nevertheless, the victim, other than the building, did not understand the situation and did not refuse the defendant's request for construction cost increase and did not intend to acquire the construction cost itself from the beginning.

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

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined in the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts: ① the Defendant entered into a contract for remodeling works with the victim C on October 31, 2009 with respect to housing owned by the victim from November 2, 2009 to December 2, 2009; the construction cost of KRW 30 million after the victim received KRW 3 million as down payment from the victim; ② the Defendant appears to have received KRW 3 million from the victim’s office for the purpose of the whole remodeling works on November 4, 2009, under the pretext of commencement of works, expenses for wooding, etc., and KRW 10 million on November 12, 2009; and KRW 25 million on November 23, 2009; ② the Defendant was to have received KRW 300,000,000 from the victim’s office at the time of the completion of construction works; ② the Defendant was to have received KRW 3,500,000 from the victim’s office.