The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal by the defendant;

A. 1) The Defendant in the part of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) is the victim I (hereinafter “victim”) on December 24, 2010.

(E) 2 Monomen of “E” located in the Republic of Korea, Jeon-nam, Ma-gun (hereinafter referred to as “the instant telecom”).

2) As to the sales contract (hereinafter “instant sales contract”)

The victim did not say that “the victim is a clean building without a tenant,” and the victim did not say that “the victim would receive a balance and settle the public charge and the deposit for lease even at the time when the purchase and sale balance was delivered KRW 420 million,00,000,000,000,000,” and the victim did not establish a right to collateral security on the franchise of this case in order to secure the remaining purchase and sale balance to be paid on January 24, 201, which was later than one year by the victim, but the defendant did not implement the right to collateral security on the franchise of this case while the amount was deducted from the rent in arrears and the unpaid public charge from the deposit to be refunded to H, who is the lessee of the franchise of this case, is equivalent to KRW 120,000,000,000,000,000,000 won, and thus the victim would take over the obligation of lease instead of paying the above purchase and sale balance of KRW 1220,000,00.

(2) The Defendant did not notify the victim of the existence of the lessee.

However, in light of the fact that the victim was aware of the existence of the tenant and did not cancel the sales contract and performed the contract as it was, and was normally transferred the ownership of the franchise of this case, it cannot be readily concluded that the victim did not conclude the sales contract of this case even if he was notified of the existence of the tenant, or that he did not pay the purchase price, and therefore, it is not obliged to notify the