사기
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The summary of the grounds of appeal reveals that even if the Defendant was not a person who actually operated the E (hereinafter “F”) company, the Defendant was well aware of the business status of the instant company, and even if having received the payment from the victim, he was aware of the fact that the payment would be used as the operating fund of the instant company, and even if having concluded a sales contract with the victim, the Defendant could be fully convicted of the Defendant of the facts charged in the instant case, even though he did not err by misapprehending the legal principles or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.
2. The Defendant in the facts charged in this case is a person who actually operated the instant company, a so-called “Planning Real Estate” company established for the purpose of real estate sales business with the head office in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D or 501.
Around June 9, 2010, the Defendant: (a) at the H Certified Judicial Scriveners Office located near Dongcheon-si, the Defendant concluded a sales contract with the victim, under the name of the director of the instant company, that “The Defendant sold KRW 331/2,645 of the amount of KRW 127,40,000, discounted 2% of the purchase price at KRW 130,000,000, at KRW 127,40,000,000, at the price of KRW 127,40,000, at the time of receipt of the remainder of the ownership transfer and the documents necessary for the registration of the purchase transfer, as the apartment and the commercial building enter the J land is immediately developed; and (b) the purchase and sale contract was concluded with the purchaser at the time of receipt of the remainder.”
However, the fact is that even if the Hashes Factory Site is expanded, this case.