A. Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as mistake of facts, the court below found Defendant A guilty of the facts charged against Defendant A, and found Defendant A guilty of the facts. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, since Defendant A, in collusion with Defendant B, deceiving G and caused G to complete the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security with the creditor as to each of the two owners of J and K land, etc., and received 80,000,000,000 won as the leading money from the same platform, etc.

B. The lower court’s sentencing against Defendant B, which was improper in sentencing, is too uncomfortable.

2. Determination

A. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts, etc. 1) The summary of the facts charged in this part of this part of the charges can be loaned KRW 800,00,00 to G, which is the owner of the J and K land, in collusion with Defendant B, at the first office operated by Defendant A, who was at the early October 2013, the first office operated by Defendant A, who was the first time of the early October 2013.

80,000,000 won was loaned to the party, which was 475,00,000 won out of the loan, and the remainder was used as a result of the loan, and thereafter, was liable and repaid until April 25, 2014.

However, the Defendants did not have any intent or ability to lend 475,00,000 won to G as if they were to provide the said land as collateral upon receiving a demand from the same platform to provide additional collateral, as the Defendants had been engaged in the supply transaction with the same platform and the company.

Defendant

A on October 29, 2013, G had creditors register the creation of a right to collateral security at KRW 1,040,000,000 with respect to the two weeks J and K land, etc., and had creditors register the right to collateral security at KRW 1,040,00.