The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual errors or misapprehension of legal principles) is that the defendant belongs to the complainant as the right holder of 1/3 of the site of C building; the defendant terminated the delegation contract for the purchase of the site of C building concluded by the defendant; and sold part of the shares to J on September 29, 2006, the defendant could not transfer the shares of H to the complainant; the defendant impliedly received part payment from the complainant for sale and purchase of the site; although the mortgage was established on September 26, 2006 on the part of the defendant's share of the site, the defendant did not notify the complainant; even though the defendant was not the mortgagee of the second floor of C building, the mortgagee of the building belongs to seven persons including the defendant; even though the defendant was not the mortgagee of the second floor building, the defendant used the purchase price for personal purposes without paying the purchase price received from the victim; the real estate owned by the defendant has no value of exclusive property such as the market price established; and it is sufficiently impossible to preserve the right to the site of C building.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The prosecutor of the judgment of the court below also argued that each of the facts charged in this case against the defendant was guilty on the grounds of the above reasons for appeal. However, the court below held that the defendant was innocent on the ground that it is difficult to recognize the defendant's intent to commit deception or fraud, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge the defendant's intent to commit deception or fraud, on the sole basis of the facts that the above reasons alleged by the prosecutor are not recognized or some

B. According to the records, the Defendant around August 7, 2003.