The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and improper sentencing);

A. The judgment of the court below that recognized the establishment of a false accusation against the defendant on the ground that D did not take money from the defendant or take money by deception, although the 100 million won was stolen or taken by the defendant in fact, there is an error of misunderstanding the facts.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court and the first instance court regarding the assertion of misunderstanding of facts, i.e., the following facts and circumstances, which are ① from the investigative agency to the court of the lower court, to the court of the lower court, that it is merely a fact that it entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant, and that it was a fact that it received money from the Defendant as a penalty from the Defendant, but it was merely a fact that it did not perform contractual obligation, and there was no receipt from the Defendant of money such

In light of the fact that the Defendant made a statement “”, ② in fact, the Defendant and D prepared a real estate transaction contract stating that the Defendant would pay D penalty of KRW 50 million to D on August 12, 201, and ③ the Defendant, immediately after the Defendant’s complaint, asserted that “D voluntarily prepared the said contract without the Defendant’s consent,” and subsequently, revised its assertion to the effect that “The said contract was made in the presence of the Defendant and the Defendant’s child H, but it does not have a direct contract.” In light of the above, it is sufficiently recognized that the Defendant had rejected D as stated in the reasoning of the lower judgment.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

B. As to the wrongful assertion of sentencing, the Defendant is favorable to the Defendant that there is no particular criminal record, except that having been sentenced to a fine on one occasion.

On the other hand, the defendant committed the crime of this case.