The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is not guilty. The summary of the judgment against the defendant shall be published.

1. On February 2, 2012, the facts charged and the facts charged by the lower court, the Defendant established the maximum amount of KRW 600,000,000,000 with respect to the claim on the E, F, G, H, I, J, K, and L land (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”), which is the Defendant’s possession, and the lower court’s establishment of the NA-based collective security right (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”). On October 30, 2015, the Defendant released the collective security right and repaid the debt to the victim M& and Q, an agent of N, by selling the land if the right is revoked.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, in fact, even if the land was sold by cancelling the right to collateral security on the land, there was no intention to repay the debt to the victims.

The Defendant received the documents related to the cancellation of the lower right from the above Q immediately, and subsequently deleted all of the above collateral security rights covering KRW 598,911,977 of the victim M’s claim amount and KRW 804,052,406 of the victim N’s claim amount, and acquired property profits equivalent to KRW 1,402,964,383 of the total amount.

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. The Defendant did not commit deception and did not have the intent to commit fraud.

The Defendant sold each of the instant real estate and demanded the victims to cancel the right to collateral security of each of the instant real estate in order to repay their obligations. However, in the absence of the cancellation of compulsory execution based on the final judgment between the Defendant and the victim N, there is no fact that the Defendant immediately paid the purchase price of each of the instant real estate to the victims and paid their obligations under the circumstances where the right to collateral security established in another real estate owned by the Defendant was not cancelled.

Between the defendant and the victims' representative Q, a solution to the cancellation of the past mortgage on the defendant's other real estate and the overlapping judgment of the victim N is established.