A. The Defendant, along with the victim, was aware of the fact that: “A” with the victim, he did not bear a half of the purchase price of each of the above land at approximately 343,062,720 square meters of H shares No. 1043,062,720 of G shares No. 129 of G shares No. 343,062,720 of G shares No. 129 of 581,95 square meters of 581,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,003,0343,062,728,000,00.

Even if each of the lands of this case is purchased, considering the cost of creating a collateral security, introduction fee of KRW 30,000,000 paid by the Defendant, the difference in the sales price lower by the Defendant’s negotiation, and the transfer income tax to be borne by the buyer if the ownership transfer registration is conducted after obtaining land transaction permission, etc., the part borne by the Defendant is equivalent to half of the purchase price for each of the lands of this case. Thus, the Defendant is not deceiving the victim, but did not deceiving the victim

B. The sentence of the lower court (one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable in light of all the conditions of sentencing.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The judgment of fraud as to the assertion of mistake of facts is established by deceiving another person, and thereby acquiring property or pecuniary benefits from the defective intent resulting therefrom. The essence of fraud is to acquire property or pecuniary benefits from deception, thereby infringing on the other party’s property. Therefore, it is not necessary to have the other party actually suffered financial loss.

Therefore, the property acquisition is contents.