The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal and its wife consistently stated to the effect that “KV’s purchase price is 85 million won or more, and no contract is prepared for a multilateral contract,” while undergoing several investigations at the police level. In light of the following: (a) the Defendant’s statement was reversed from the prosecutor’s office to the effect that “KV’s purchase price is 110 million won or more; and (b) the Defendant paid the difference of 25 million won to J, the seller,” and there is no objective evidence suggesting that the Defendant paid the difference of 25 million won to J.

On the other hand, the KJ consistently stated that “the purchase price is KRW 85 million,” and around May 14, 2008, the KJ deposited KRW 20 million in the account under the name of the J. However, the time at which the Defendant’s side exchanged the KRW 20 million in cash, and there was a difference between the time when the Defendant’s side exchanged the KRW 20 million in cash, and the KRW 55 million deposited in the said account from time to time. As such, it is natural that the J would not properly memory the source of KRW 20 million deposited in its own account.

In addition, if the difference is paid in cash as the defendant's argument, the court should pay not only KRW 20 million but also KRW 25 million. In light of the fact that the J receives the above KRW 30 million as a check, it is difficult to deem that the J requested the difference in cash.

In addition, the victim consistently stated that “the contract was prepared, and the purchase price was 110 million won,” and the statement to the effect that it did not undergo a sufficient investigation into the market price, etc. due to the friendship relation with the real estate agent M is also believed.

Nevertheless, the lower court rejected the statements made by the J and the victim as above, and the Defendant’s side without credibility.