The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The sentence of the court below (two years of imprisonment) against the defendant in the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of the Defendant, in violation of the duties of the real estate seller, set up a right to collateral security on the temporary lot number I (land substitution) 323 square meters in G among G, among G, within the urban development project zone within the G, in order to ensure that the Defendant violated the duties of the seller of real estate, thereby causing damage to K, which is the purchaser, to reach approximately KRW 1.5 billion. The Defendant paid 1.7 billion from the victimized company as the down payment and intermediate payment, but did not perform the registration of ownership transfer on the said land to the victimized company

However, the defendant is divided into and against the crime of this case in this court for more than one year after the date of the conclusion of the contract of this case, and the defendant appears to have established the right to collateral security as above to pay the balance of the above land to Cor Don Don LLC Co., Ltd. which is the original seller, even though he had not received any balance from the injured company even though more than one year has passed since the date of the conclusion of the contract of this case, and in fact, the defendant paid the borrowed money to Cor Don Don e, and registered the transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant with respect to the above land. The damaged company sought to cancel the contract rather than paying the balance to the defendant. Accordingly, the damaged company and the defendant did not seem to have sufficiently expressed the intent or ability to pay the balance to the defendant. In light of the circumstances surrounding the late payment of the damage company, the damage incurred to the injured company mainly resulted from the decline in the land price after the contract of this case.