The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant, as the owner of the Gangwon-do Hongcheon-gun C and D land (hereinafter “instant land”), requested G to sell the instant land as the operator of the F real estate brokerage office. In the process of sale, the victim was merely aware of the Plaintiff’s purchase of the instant land adjacent to the instant land by means of G’s brokerage, and the Defendant did not sell the instant land by deceiving the victim and selling it, the lower court convicted the Defendant by misapprehending the fact.

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

2. The Defendant alleged in the facts charged of the instant case that the instant land owned by himself/herself is very acute and hotly used as a slope. As such, he/she anticipated not to purchase and sell the instant land, and sentenced him/her to the G operating a real estate brokerage office, “F real estate,” in the Hongcheon-gun, Gangwon-do, Seoul Special Metropolitan City, for his/her own land. On July 2009, the Defendant explained him/her as his/her land and requested him/her to sell the instant land.

After that, G, on July 9, 2009, G, who was aware of such circumstances, visited the above office to purchase the site for electric power resource at the above F real estate office, provided that “I may have the land suitable for electric power resource site,” and visited H land together with the victim and introduced H land as if the explanation from the defendant were to be the land of this case. On August 9, 2009, the Defendant concluded a sales contract with the victim on the land of this case at the above office.

However, the land actually purchased by the victim was land that could not be used as a site for electric power resource because it was very high gradient and is not flat work.

As above, the Defendant.