However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The defendant is the owner of each E, F, G, H, or four parcels in Spocheon-si.

On August 12, 2015, the Defendant entered into a land sales contract with the victim K to sell the said four parcels of land in the name of the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”) at the J real estate office located in Scheon-si, Spocheon-si, in the name of the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as “instant land”). On August 13, 2015, the Defendant received KRW 94 million from the injured party as the down payment, and around October 1, 2015, the Defendant was jointly owned with the instant land.

L, M, and N’s objection did not receive any balance from the damaged party, and on November 3, 2015, upon request by M around November 3, 2015, the disposal price was decided, and the land of this case was inappropriate for the victim to register the transfer of ownership.

On January 19, 2016, the Defendant would give 300 million won to the victim's agent P at the coffee shop located in Sacheon-si on January 19, 2016, and would give the victim's agent P and immediately revoke the application for provisional disposition.

“A false statement” was made.

However, even if the defendant received money from the injured party, he did not intend to resolve the decision of provisional disposition by taking measures such as payment to M.

Defendant deceiving the victim as above and received KRW 300,000 from the injured party through P on January 20, 2016.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement by witness P and Q respectively;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Land transaction contract, and proof of the details thereof;

1. Documents related to the disposal of real estate price, and certificates for all registered matters;

1. A receipt, a performance letter, and an agreement on ownership;

1. Although the Defendant denies the crime by determining the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion on the execution of the registration procedure for transfer of ownership and the written judgment on ownership agreement, the Defendant was able to perform the act according to the contract, the Defendant was prepared as follows, i.e., the aforementioned evidence.