Defendants are innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that Defendant A operates the E-style Brokerage Office located in Ilyang-si, Busan-si, and Defendant C is a person who has worked as the head of the E-style Brokerage Office, and Defendant B is a person who engages in real estate sales business.

Defendant

B around October 23, 2014, around G and around 2014, to purchase (1,426 square meters; hereinafter “the instant forest”) 7 (98 square meters):3 (428 square meters) of the same Gu H forest owned by G at the rate of 7 (998 square meters: 50,000 square meters (hereinafter “the instant forest”) with F; however, the instant forest was introduced by the victim K, who attempted to obtain 600,000 square meters (hereinafter “the instant forest”) adjacent to the instant forest from Defendant A.

Since then, the Defendants: (a) need the victim’s land adjacent to the road; and (b) concluded that the Defendant would acquire B’s share in the instant forest land by securing up to 650 square meters, using the surrounding circumstances on the road, and sell the parts thereof to K, thereby gaining profits from resale (up to 700,000 won per square day, 65 million won).

1. Joint crimes committed by the Defendants

A. On November 2014, the Defendants, along with the Defendants, would make the part of the land available as a road by dividing it into a road if they purchase a forest land of H 4,715 square meters owned by Party B on the side of the land at which Party B was knocked.

A false statement was made to the effect that the purchase price is 450 million won or more.

However, in fact, the forest land of this case was jointly purchased by F and Defendant B for the purpose of leasing the building on the forest land in question, and B did not pay the down payment, and F did not sell the share of the forest land of this case to the victim who was awarded a successful bid for the above Goyang-gu Seoul Metropolitan City I and J forest that is a franchi fol for B, so even if the Defendants received the payment from the damaged party, they did not have the ability or intent to allow the victim to newly build a warehouse and operate a business or to use the forest of this case as a road by dividing the forest land of this case into a road.

Nevertheless, the Defendants are the defendants.