Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Of the instant facts charged, the lower court acquitted the victim K, L, and M of each fraud, and convicted the remainder of the facts charged on March 31, 2012 on the part of the instant facts charged, and convicted the Defendant and the prosecutor of the remainder of the facts charged. As such, the Defendant and the prosecutor filed an appeal only for the convicted part, and as such, the aforementioned acquittal portion became final and conclusive on the grounds that it did not appeal the aforementioned acquittal portion, the scope of the judgment of the lower court is limited to the convicted part of the lower judgment.

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In fact, misunderstanding of the legal principles and misunderstanding PP Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “P”) had a rent claim amounting to approximately KRW 1.2 billion against CM Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “CM”), and Defendant was also an individual who had a loan claim amounting to KRW 900 million against AI, and where the lease contract was not extended with Daewoo Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “CM”), it was demanded that Daewoo Construction deposit the deposit amount of KRW 2 billion. Thus, the Defendant could not have anticipated such fact. The Defendant kept the lessee’s deposit in the account of Daewoo Construction Co., Ltd. and joint management at around the time of the instant crime. The judgment of the lower court seems to have returned the deposit money of approximately KRW 30 billion, and the lower court did not appear to have concluded a sub-lease contract after the possibility of cancelling the lease contract between Daewoo Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “O”) and the P, but did not have any possibility to terminate the lease contract merely because it did not constitute an act of deception or termination.