The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. In light of the various evidences and circumstances, such as the victim and lessee's statements in the investigation agency and the court below's decision, the defendant, without legitimate delegation from the victim about the execution of each of the instant lease contracts, shall be deemed to have forged the lease contract without permission, and the defendant, even though there is no plan to purchase the real estate located in Namyang-si, could sufficiently recognize the fact of deceiving the victim with money by deceiving the victim, the court below acquitted the defendant of the facts charged, which affected the conclusion of the judgment

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) the Defendant, as a real estate broker, recommended the victim C to make an investment in real estate through the National Institute of Culture; (b) purchased several houses using the same in the name of the victim on or around January 2, 2007; and (c) issued a rental business registration certificate for the victim on or around January 2, 2007; and (d) did not have been entrusted by the victim to raise the deposit money to the tenants; (b) he did so to the tenant as if he did not actually collect the deposit or actually received the lawful delegation from the victim; and (c) the Defendant had the tenant raise the deposit by using the money as an agent for his real estate investment, etc.; and (d) on September 1, 2009, the Defendant had the Plaintiff use the deposit money under the name of the lessor’s agent, who was the lessor’s name and duty at the office located adjacent to the Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Licensed Real Estate Agent Agreement 401, which had been delegated by the Defendant.