택지개발촉진법위반
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. Even if the person was not the person who was supplied with the first housing site, the person who purchased and resells the land from the person who was supplied with the housing site by clearly setting profits from the resale and acquiring the land constitutes “person supplied with the housing site” under the Housing Site Development Promotion Act, and thus, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant, is erroneous in matters of law or
2. The court below found the defendant not guilty on the grounds of its stated reasoning. Examining the various circumstances acknowledged by the court below in comparison with records, the above judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error of law of mistake as alleged by the prosecutor.
3. Ex officio determination of the ancillary charges added in the trial
A. The prosecutor of the amendment of the indictment added the ancillary charges as stated below in the trial of the party, and applied for the amendment of the indictment in the name of the crime "B", "Violation of the Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Real Estate," and "Article 8 subparagraph 1 and Article 2 (2) of the "Act on Special Measures for the Registration of Real Estate," respectively, and the same is added by the court's permission.
(b) A person who has entered into a contract with the content that the ownership of the real estate in the summary of the preliminary charge shall be transferred, if the parties to the contract bear a quid pro quo obligation, the day the performance of the consideration is completed, or if only one of the parties bears a liability, if either of the parties intends to enter into a contract with the third party concerning the ownership transfer of the real estate again or a contract concerning the ownership transfer to the third party again after the day the contract becomes effective, he/she shall file an application for
The defendant on November 2010.