A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a person who has operated real estate brokerage business from around 2010 to the second half of 2017.

around September 2015, the Defendant appears to have “D” as stated in the Victim B Bill to be a clerical error in “B” and corrected ex officio.

The purpose of this paper is to purchase the right to sell the housing site of Pyeongtaek-si C and sell the housing site of KRW 110 million to KRW 180 million and to provide the profit of KRW 70 million by selling KRW 180,000,000 for KRW 100,000 to the injured party and to purchase the above right to sell the housing site of KRW 180,000 under the victim's name and sell it to KRW 180,000.

However, on February 2016, the above sales contract was reversed due to the failure of the seller's qualifications, and the defendant returned KRW 110 million from the seller of the right to sell in lots. The victim would purchase the land of Pyeongtaek-si located in Pyeongtaek-si in total with KRW 165 million returned at the time of normal sale and purchase and as if he received KRW 180 million from the buyer of the right to sell in lots. The victim would purchase the land of KRW 165 million in total with the purchase price refunded at KRW 180 million.

In conclusion, with the consent of F, the above operator of the above gas station, the sales contract for the gas station site was concluded in the name of the victim with the consent of F, which is the above operator of the gas station.

However, on November 1, 2016, the above sales contract for the gas station site was terminated due to the failure of F to meet F’s license, and the Defendant received and kept the purchase price of KRW 350 million in return on November 201, 2016. However, the victim requesting the return of the purchase price was concealed in the fact that the purchase price was returned, and the victim would receive the refund of the purchase price from the seller of the above gas station site, leading up to the time, and the victim would first demand the return even if he prepared by the Defendant, and returned the amount of KRW 30 million in preference to the victim on November 16, 2016.

Therefore, the defendant is the name of the purchase price for the above gas station site from the injured party.