On May 28, 2013, the Defendant, as the representative director of C (hereinafter referred to as “C”), made E, an employee of the said company office of Gangnam-gu Seoul company No. 201, Gangnam-gu, Seoul, enter into a sales contract for the instant part of the land with the victim F, stating that “If the Defendant entered into a sales contract with the victim F as the price for the instant part of the land at KRW 55 million (hereinafter referred to as “the instant part of the land”), he/she would transfer ownership, and if the price is paid in lump sum, he/she would have the victim and the instant part of the land at KRW 27,471 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “the instant land”).

However, on April 26, 2013, C was determined as the highest bidder on the instant land at the sale date, and on May 3, 2013, the facts charged in the facts charged indicated as “ May 6, 2013,” but seems to be a clerical error in “ May 3, 2013.”

(Investigation Records 27,107 pages) The owner did not receive a successful bid because he was in a state of being subject to a ruling of denial of sale on the grounds that the original copy of the ruling of refusal to sell was impossible to serve.

Therefore, even if the Defendant entered into a sales contract with the victim on the instant land, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to transfer ownership finally.

Ultimately, the defendant is stated as a single crime in the indictment jointly with the defendant E, but according to evidence, it is recognized as a joint crime by the defendant and E, so long as it seems that there is no risk of substantial disadvantage to the defendant's exercise of his/her right to defense, it is recognized as

The victim deceivings the victim and then received 53.9 million won from the victim to the account in the name of C on the same day as the purchase price.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. A complaint;

1.Each.