The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In relation to the fraud, even though the Defendant had already been paid KRW 80 million by the purchaser of the instant housing in terms of the remodeling construction cost, the Defendant may sell the instant housing to the victim by bringing about KRW 40 million in the construction cost as the buyer wants to undertake the remodeling, as he had already been paid KRW 80 million from the purchaser of the instant housing in terms of the remodeling construction cost. The Defendant was paid KRW 40,000,000 as the remodeling construction cost in addition to the brokerage commission in relation to the sale and purchase of the instant housing by making a false representation.

Therefore, although the defendant could have acquired the above construction cost of KRW 40 million from the victim, the court below found the defendant not guilty of the fraud among the facts charged in this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

B. In relation to the violation of the Licensed Real Estate Agents Act, it is difficult to view that the Defendant performed the sales agency business, unlike ordinary real estate brokerage business, and it was deemed that the Defendant engaged in the sales agency business without registration. However, among the facts charged in this case, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of violation of the Licensed Real Estate Agents Act, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In relation to the fraud, the lower court: (a) deemed that the Defendant entered into a sales agency contract with the victim to determine the sales commission of the instant house as KRW 80 million; and (b) received KRW 77,360,000, which was the remainder after deducting taxes from the victim’s sales commission, after selling the instant house; and (c) at the time when the Defendant received KRW 77,360,000 from the victim, there was a criminal intent to acquire by deception the Defendant at the time of receiving KRW 77,360,00 from the victim.

or the defendant committed deception.

There is a causal relationship between the defendant's deception and the dispositive act based on mistake of the victim.

The defendant's property due to the act of disposal by the victim.