Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

However, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts and acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case.

2. In the case of an ex officio determination prosecutor, the name of the crime was in violation of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act, and the applicable provisions of law were “Article 141 subparag. 5 and Article 118(1) of the National Land Planning and Utilization Act,” and the application for changes in indictment with the following facts charged was filed, and the subject of the adjudication was changed by this court upon permission.

Therefore, it is no longer necessary to judge the prosecutor's assertion of mistake.

And as seen below, this Court found the Defendant guilty of the modified charges, so the judgment of the court below is no longer able to maintain them.

(3) The judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and the judgment below is reversed, and it is again decided as follows.

Punishment of the crime

Any party who intends to enter into a contract to transfer the ownership of land located within the area permitted for a land transaction contract shall obtain permission from the competent authority.

Around February 6, 2012, the Defendant, without obtaining permission from the competent authority for a land transaction contract, entered into a land transaction contract with F that purchases part of the share of the instant land with a certain equity right holders of the 793m2 in the North-Gu E-Gu, Ma-gu, Ma-si (hereinafter “instant land”) located in the area subject to land transaction permission, and entered into a contract with G, a certain equity right holder of the instant land.