An applicant for compensation shall be dismissed.

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles 1) The Defendant’s fraud against the victim D is the Defendant’s building in Suwon-gu G commercial building in Suwon-gu, Suwon-gu (hereinafter “instant building”).

(2) After selling the money, the court below erred in misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, although the Defendant was in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) against the victim F, even though he had the intent and ability to repay the money at the time of borrowing the money from the victim, he was unable to repay the money by losing the ability to repay the money due to a decline in the real estate price caused by the continuous real estate economy since 2010. However, the court below erred in misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. In light of the following circumstances acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court, the lower court determined that the Defendant, as indicated in its reasoning, by deceiving the victim, obtained KRW 30 million, and by deceiving the victim of KRW 230 million, excluding KRW 70 million paid to H, was recognized. (A) The victim and the victim’s child F, who represented the victim, sold the building of this case by H, and was entrusted with specific negotiations to the Defendant, and during this process, the Defendant set the brokerage commission for H.

B H demanded KRW 100 million as a brokerage commission, but the defendant should pay KRW 300 million as a brokerage commission to the injured party.