All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

A. Defendant 1) The part of the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes) was remitted from D to KRW 12 million by the Defendant. However, upon the Defendant’s request, the Defendant was paid KRW 12 million as expenses incurred in creating “a post-management appraisal report” suitable for C’s loans (a loan made without undergoing regular appraisal process by the appraisal corporation). Although it was not remitted under the same name as the criminal facts stated in the judgment of the court below, the court below held that the Defendant received KRW 12 million from D under the same name as the criminal facts stated in the judgment of the court below.

Therefore, the court below erred by misunderstanding facts or misunderstanding legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B) The Defendant did not pay any balance (250 million won) to the victim D with the lapse of three months from the time of the conclusion of the sales contract as stated in the judgment of the court below, thereby cancelling the above sales contract.

Since the above contract of sale and purchase was established by borrowing KRW 50 million from J after lawful rescission, the defendant was not in the position of a person who administers another's business, and although the defendant did not have an intention to commit a breach of trust, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the charges on the grounds as stated in its reasoning. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of breach of trust or by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of breach of trust, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

C) There was no threat of the victim on the grounds as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, and the amount of KRW 51.8 million as indicated in the judgment below is merely the remainder of the newly concluded sales contract after the lawful rescission of the original sales contract. It is so decided as per the judgment of the court below.