The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, the Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principles, tried to pay the purchase price of the instant land agreed upon to the victim by carrying out the new construction of multi-households and the sale of multi-households on the instant land, but only failed to pay the money due to the disruptions to the above housing project plan due to the problems such as building permission, etc., and

However, the court below found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles as to the criminal intent by deception, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding the facts and legal principles, the lower court determined as follows. (1) The Defendant: (a) promoted a new project to build a multi-household house on the second parcel of land, such as Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu; (b) entered into a sales contract on the land under J at the time, for the land owned by J; and (c) paid KRW 120 million out of the purchase price by offering J-owned land as collateral; and (d) borrowing KRW 190 million from a corporate bonds company; (b) it was impossible to complete the registration of transfer of ownership due to the failure to pay the remainder of the purchase price; and (b) in order to secure access roads to build a multi-household house on the land owned by the victim and the above land owned by J-owned by the victim; and (b) in order to solve the issue of access roads, the Defendant did not permit the use of the above land and the above land to be paid to KRW 300 million on October 10, 2013.