The judgment of the court of first instance (including the portion of innocence) and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a period of four years and six months.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1’s misunderstanding of facts) The Defendant did not deceiving the representative X of V, and did not intend to commit the crime of defraudation. Defendant did not intend to commit the crime of deception.

The defendant has been maintaining trust with the Indonesia government, such as sexual intercourse with the Indonesia AP construction project contract.

X knowingly requested the defendant to be given an opportunity to participate in the business, and entered into a contract with V to participate in the business and received an investment amount of KRW 700 million.

As X first asked X to participate in the project, there was no reason to set up security against X.

At the time, the defendant had the intent and ability to participate in the Y project, but the project has been delayed and has not been able to do so due to the circumstances of Indonesia and the Korean government.

B) AC Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “AC”)

AC well-known that the construction cost falls short of KRW 10 billion on the ground that the Defendant did not commit deception (Article 1-b of the facts stated in the judgment below) and that the Defendant did not have any intent to commit deception. The instant contract was replaced by a consulting service contract related to the “owner of Indonesia Development Project” concluded between the Defendant and AC around December 2014. With respect to the construction cost other than the brand occupants, the area of JE-free shop AF zone in the BX Notice No. 234 square meters (785 square meters) is merely 234 square meters (70.785 square meters) under the BX Notice No. 200, which was already announced, and thus, the Defendant was well aware of the fact that the construction cost falls short of KRW 10 billion. In addition, at the time, the Defendant participated in the JE Tax Exemption

A) both Company A and Q (hereinafter “A Q”)

AC had an intention or ability to give duty-free shop construction, but AW and Q have paid a bid bond, because they were in charge of consulting duties and had the authority to select a construction company under the consulting contract.