2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the Defendant, even though there was no right to sell from the middle of November 2010 to the first of December 2011, 2010, was transferred KRW 37 million from the victims under the name of the apartment sale contract, and acquired it by deceiving the victims as if he had no right to sell.

B. The lower court found the Defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged on the ground that it is reasonable to deem that the Defendant trusted that, at the time of receiving the sales contract from the victims, the Defendant would have been effectively delegated the right to sell the small-scale ordinary household from the Hyundai Swiss Savings Bank at the time of receiving the sales contract, considering the following: (a) the Defendant said that the Defendant, the side of the Defendant, was under way without any interruption of delegation negotiation on the right to sell the apartment; (b) the I practically proceeded with the delegation negotiation on the right to sell the apartment; and (c) the Defendant and other sellers trusted that negotiations on the delegation of the right to sell the apartment; (d) the Defendant allowed the Defendant to conclude a provisional contract with the victims; and (e) the Defendant finally concluded the negotiations after receiving the sales contract from the victims.

C. At the time of receiving the sales contract from the investigative agency to the present court, the Defendant stated that the negotiations from H, which had been in charge of negotiating the right to sell the apartment of this case, would be completed at the time of receiving the sales contract from the victims.