All appeals filed by the prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal - In light of the following circumstances revealed through the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendants had the intent to defraud the Defendants at the time of receiving the payment of KRW 185 million ( KRW 195 million for Defendant A and B) from the victim I.

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case as erroneous.

A. At the time of receiving money from the injured party, there was a dispute over the ownership of the H building site at the time of receiving money, and it was also not clear whether the project will proceed smoothly due to the lusing (PF) loan made by the project strike.

B. Although the agreed term of the agreement was 31 billion won loan at the end of the credit settlement, the Defendants closed the business of E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) for which the initial right to sell in lots was granted, and newly established K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K”) to sell in lots, and subsequently received the right to sell in lots again, and received 2.4 billion won from the sales commission, the Defendants did not pay to the victims the amount of money with the first agreed interest derived from hiding such fact.

(c)

On November 4, 2011, the Defendants prepared a written agreement between F and F that the Defendants would be responsible for the obligations owed to the victims by the Defendants, and there was no intention to obtain fraud.

One of the arguments is that it is difficult to expect F to pay the amount of damage to the victim as well as not only the content of the written agreement on the validity of the victim, but also the content of it is unclear.

2. Summary of the facts charged and the judgment of the court below

A. Summary of the facts charged 1) Defendants A and B are the respective representative directors of the Defendants’ joint crimes, and Defendant C is the employee of Defendant A, and the Defendants are the F around the end of 2007 with the construction and sale on the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government G ground.