The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact, misunderstanding of the legal doctrine and misunderstanding F did not request F to raise funds for public sale, not an employee of the Defendant Company.

There was no lack of contact with the victim G.

F An apartment complex D in the D Main Complex located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and 61, where the construction is suspended and the public sale procedure is in progress (hereinafter referred to as the "multi-unit apartment of this case").

Subject to the internal contract of construction work, it was possible to give money to the injured party, and 20,000 won from F and paid money to the financial intermediary broker.

The above money shall not be acquired in collusion with F.

B. The punishment of the lower court is too heavy.

2. Determination

A. Examining the following circumstances based on the evidence revealed in the lower court’s judgment as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, it is recognized that the Defendant was paid KRW 20 million by deceiving the victim through F, who believed the Defendant’s false statement in the facts charged, to be true.

(1) F is a person who has a great interest in the resumption of construction due to the failure to receive materials and construction cost invested as a result of the discontinuance of construction after participating in the structural construction of the apartment in this case with the Defendant.

F If it is possible to prepare the down payment, the F may obtain a large amount of loans from the new bank and resume the construction by acquiring the ownership of the apartment of this case.

“The Defendant seems to have been involved in the raising of the funds in accordance with the Defendant’s explicit and implied instruction.”

The facts charged of this case are not inconsistent with the facts charged, since the defendant acquired money from the damaged person through the F that the defendant believed that he was aware of his speech, and the defendant did not have a direct face-to-face face with the injured person or did not conspired with F.

(2) The F shall be "K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "K") at an investigative agency.

. The defendant who is the representative director.