A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

The application for compensation of this case is dismissed.

The Defendant, even though he did not have the intent or ability to repay the investment money within the agreed time limit, by deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged, and by defrauding KRW 100 million from

2. The facts charged in this case

The Defendant did not agree to enter into a sales contract with the owner of the land in Ansan-si, Ansan-si (hereinafter “the instant land”). Therefore, even if the Defendant received an investment of KRW 100 million from the victim Nonindicted 2 as the sales contract amount for the said land, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to repay KRW 125 million within nine days by neglecting the profit of KRW 25 million.

Nevertheless, at the victim's office located in Bupyeong-gu, Seocheon-si (hereinafter 2 omitted), on June 20, 2007, the victim made a false statement to the effect that "the victim is planned to build and sell a commercial building on the third and the sixth floor above the ground after purchasing the above land, but if the land purchase contract amount is deficient and the amount of KRW 100 million is invested, the victim will repay KRW 125 million up to June 29, 2007." The defendant deceiving the victim as such, and received KRW 100 million from the victim as a cashier's checks under the name of investment.

3. Determination

In light of the lower court’s reasoning and the evidence duly admitted and investigated, the Defendant was not only obligated to construct a new building on June 20, 207, which was 00,000 won for the following reasons: (a) the Defendant was able to purchase the said new building from Nonindicted Party 1 to 7, and that it was difficult for the Defendant to enter into a new sales contract with the Defendant on June 20, 2007, and (b) the Defendant was 00,000,000,000,000 won for 7,000,000,000,000 won for 7,000,000,000 won for 1,000,000,000 won for 7,000,000,000 won for 1,000,000,000 won for 7,000,000 won for 1,000,000 won for 2,00.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, since the prosecutor's appeal is well-grounded, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act, and it is again decided as follows.

1. The legal statement of the witness non-indicted 1

1. Part of the witness’s statement in the second trial record of the lower court’s second trial

1. An investment agreement and a receipt;

Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act (Selection of Imprisonment)

1. Orders for compensation;

Articles 25(3)3, 32(1) and (2) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (the scope of compensation for the accused is not clear)

Judges Lee Byung-hee (Presiding Judge) (Presiding Justice)