Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

1. 2012No717: Defendant A;

A. In light of the fact that the victim E was aware of the fact that the Defendant was entitled to dispose of the shares of forest land at the time of Sungnam in the facts charged, and the victim E was aware of the fact that the actual owner is HF AP through a certified copy of the register, etc., it is not recognized that the Defendant was guilty of fraud, or that the causal relationship between deception and mistake is not recognized.

B. The victim I merely borrowed KRW 30 million from the victim I, and the victim I did not deceiving the victim I by making a false statement, such as this part of the facts charged, and at the time, the defendant had the intent or ability to repay due to sufficient financial capabilities.

C. Of this part of the victim K, 25 million won, out of this part, 28 million won, was borrowed to cover election expenses, and 3 million won was received as an item of expenses necessary to prepare a design drawing to resolve the problem by m’s elimination of gas stations. As such, it is merely merely a civil obligation obligation, and it does not receive money under the pretext of obtaining by fraud or solicitation of public officials, such as facts charged.

It is true that the victim N did not deceiving the victim N by making a false statement, such as this part of the facts charged, and the above victim delivered this part of the defraudation money to the defendant under the name of investment in the oil station business, and KK introduced the above victim, along with the above victim, did not dismiss the defendant.

E. The first instance court’s imprisonment (two years of imprisonment, additional collection 28 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Case 2012No3354: Defendants

A. Defendant A (1) through mistake of facts.