All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

Defendant

A The Defendant, like the facts charged, did not in collusion with the above defendant B, and did not deceiving the victim E.

(De Facto Error). The sentencing of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(F) The sentencing of Defendant B (one year of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(2) The court below's decision and the court below's decision are consistent with the following facts: ① the defendant is the owner of the land of this case, namely, ① the defendant was directly involved in the process of cancelling the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security (the maximum debt amount of KRW 165 million established in the victim's name on March 9, 2010) as stated in the facts charged. ② When the defendant had cancelled the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security (the right to collateral security) from the defendant at the time of delivering the above documents to the court below, the victim stated that he would borrow the land of this case as collateral and pay the balance of KRW 165 million,000,000,000 from the defendant at the time of delivering the above documents to the court below's decision, and the defendant's statement prepared to the victim on July 2, 2010 also conforms to the above statement, ③ the defendant's assertion that he conspireds with the defendant's instructions and the defendant's statements in the charges of this case (the defendant's second evidence).

As to the Defendants’ assertion of unfair sentencing, Defendant A does not seem to have led to the instant crime, and Defendant B would be healthy due to urology, etc.