All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of the facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below

A. The summary of the facts charged in this case is as follows: (a) at the E office located in Changwon-si, Changwon-si on June 15, 2010, the Defendant carried out a mountainous district development project for the victim F to the victim F for the land outside the Gyeong-gun, Gyeong-gun, and six parcels (hereinafter “instant land”); and (b) to purchase the mountainous district of KRW 26,000,000, KRW 26,000,000 per square meter; (c) there is a lack of expenses for permission for mountainous district development projects; and (d) if the victim borrowed the above land to H as collateral and again lends it to the Defendant, the Defendant would pay KRW 30,000,000 as sales contract, and use the remaining KRW 70,000 as the cost of mountainous district development permission.

After obtaining permission for mountainous district development, it was false that the bank will receive loans from the next bank and pay the remainder of the purchase price in full.

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to obtain permission for mountainous district development of the above land from the Si/Gun, and did not have any intention or ability to purchase the above mountainous district in accordance with the above agreement.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim as above, had the victim establish the right to collateral security of KRW 150 million with respect to the said mountainous district, and had the victim borrow KRW 100 million with respect to the said mountainous district from H, on June 15, 2010, remitted KRW 45 million from the victim to the Agricultural Cooperative Account in the name of the Defendant, and on June 16, 2010, acquired KRW 25 million in total from the victim to the said Agricultural Cooperative Account.

B. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in the instant case by comprehensively taking account of each of the evidence indicated in the lower judgment.

2. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) The fact-finding defendant's failure to develop the land of this case is only a cause to cooperate in obtaining permission for mountainous district development, unlike the promise that the victim had committed with the defendant, and the defendant shall be granted permission for mountainous district development of the land of this case.