The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

The Defendant in the facts charged of the instant case stated that the Defendant’s house located in Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government around December 2, 2008, the indictment of this case and the judgment of the court below in the Seoul Jongno-gu D, Seoul, where the Defendant owned a part of ownership (3/17) between the victim C and the victim C indicated that the area of the instant land was 366 square meters from the time of conclusion of the instant sales contract, but the area of the instant land was 652 square meters at the time of conclusion of the instant sales contract, and the area of the instant land was 366 square meters due to the division on February 16, 2009, which was after the conclusion of the instant sales contract.

Since the land of this case continues to belong to the land of this case before and after the above division, it is not subject to the amendment procedures.

(C) Of the instant land (hereinafter “instant land”), the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract (hereinafter “the instant sales contract”) with the content that sells five square meters (5 square meters (hereinafter “5 square meters”) to the victim, which constitutes a boundary between neighboring E and neighboring E, and received KRW 7,50,000 in total as the contract deposit and remainder by the sixth day of the same month from the injured party, and thus, there was a duty to cooperate with the victim to complete the registration of transfer of ownership by dividing the instant five square meters into the instant land.

Nevertheless, the Defendant breached the above duty and entered into a contract for selling the instant land to F and G at an insane place in Seoul (Seoul) around December 2015, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership in F and G at the registry office of the Seoul Central District Court (Seoul Central District Court) around December 29, 2015.

As a result, the Defendant acquired approximately KRW 11,965,00 of the market price of the land of 5 square meters in this case, and caused a loss equivalent to the same amount to the victim.

For the following reasons, the lower court determined that the Defendant is in a position to handle the affairs of the victimized person.

Since the facts charged in this case cannot be seen as a case where there is no proof of crime, Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act is deemed to be the case.