The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal was known that the remainder of the apartment, which is the object of brokerage, is not paid in full, while the Defendant knew of the fact that the remainder of the apartment, which is the object of brokerage, is not paid in full, the Defendant made an excessive decision by the FF as if the transfer of ownership is completed in G under the name of the buyer and the lessor as if he

2. Determination

A. In full view of the evidence as indicated in the judgment of the court below, the court below revealed the following as follows: ① “At present conversion for sale in lots”, “the actual loan amount shall be 60% of the parcelling-out price”, “Lessee may terminate this contract at will, collect deposit money by means of voluntary sale, etc., and claim for the amount of damages of lessee,” and “the move-in report shall be made after the establishment of bank mortgage; ② on December 19, 2012, the remainder payment date of the instant lease agreement, the Defendant confirmed that G was paid in full, and confirmed that the remainder payment was paid in full by G, Inc. (hereinafter “H”) was received from I; ③ The investigation agency concluded a lease agreement with G, such as intermediate payment, and received lease deposit from F, and the Defendant did not receive a written confirmation of the remainder payment from G12, which was 20 days before the date of the remainder payment. However, the Defendant did not receive a written confirmation from G20.