A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

A. The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment, although the defendant did not have any intent or ability to make the victim obtain business approval on each of the land of this case or to complete the registration of ownership transfer based on such intent, thereby deceiving the victim.

B. The prosecutor’s sentence of the lower court (ten months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. The main facts charged (the prosecutor added the ancillary facts charged to the appellate court) and the judgment of the court below

A. The summary of the primary facts charged is that the Defendant is the actual operator of D who is registered as the representative director by the wife C.

On October 208, the Defendant agreed to sell all of the housing development projects rights to H and 13 lots of land (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) and each of the instant lands to G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) operated by the victim F at the office D office of the second floor E-building Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) at the same time, with the purchase price of KRW 2.14 billion, the Defendant paid the purchase price first from the victim and agreed to sell the ownership transfer registration within 30 days from the date of approval for the project.

However, around August 2008, the Defendant purchased each of the above lands to the former owner I, which was prior to the instant sales contract, and did not pay 464 million won for the remaining purchase price, and only the ownership transfer registration of each of the above lands was made in the Defendant’s wife C under the Defendant’s wife C. However, the Defendant appeared to have been trying to exercise his right on the land subject to sale, such as setting up a provisional attachment for the said I who did not receive the purchase price.

Accordingly, the defendant is entitled to the above I when concluding the contract of this case.