1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On September 2006, the Plaintiff recommended the Defendant to purchase 661m2 (hereinafter “C equity”) out of 3560m2, Gyeonggi-do Forest C, Gyeonggi-do, 3560m2 (hereinafter “C equity”), and the Plaintiff was to complete the transfer of registration on behalf of the Defendant.

Accordingly, on September 13, 2006, the Defendant remitted KRW 20 million to the Plaintiff. The actual purchase price for C shares was KRW 14 million, and the purchase price was KRW 6 million under the sales contract.

B. On December 2006, the Plaintiff recommended the Defendant to purchase a 6,612 square meters of the 151,527 square meters of Gyeonggi-do Forest D Forest land (hereinafter “D shares”) in Gyeonggi-do, Gyeonggi-do, and the Plaintiff, as well as the co-owned share holders, intended to complete the transfer of registration on behalf of the Defendant.

The defendant accepted this and remitted 50 million won to the plaintiff as the purchase price.

C. On August 2009, the Plaintiff, upon cancelling the registration of transfer of ownership of the said D shares, ordered the Defendant to sell the said shares to another person immediately and return KRW 50 million to the other person.

Accordingly, the defendant revoked the registration of ownership transfer on September 18, 2009, but did not receive refund of KRW 50 million from the plaintiff.

The Defendant filed a criminal complaint against the Plaintiff on the ground that the Plaintiff, even though the purchase price of C’s shares was 6 million won, was added to KRW 14 million by deceiving the Defendant, and that even though it was not enough to refund KRW 50 million in relation to D’s shares, the Defendant, by deceiving the Defendant, lost ownership of D’s shares by causing the cancellation of the registration of ownership transfer and thereby making the Plaintiff lose ownership of D’s shares.

On September 12, 2013, the Plaintiff appears to be difficult to recognize that the purchase price was 6 million won with respect to the part of the acquired money in excess of the purchase price with respect to the “C share” portion from the Ji Government District Court, and also included the costs of civil engineering works in the amount of KRW 20 million. The Defendant is more interested in how much gains can remain through the future development rather than the purchase of the said forest and fields.