The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Fact-misunderstanding, misunderstanding of legal principles, at the time when the Defendant established a right to collateral security with respect to the land Gangwon-gun, the sales contract for the said land was already rescinded upon the Defendant’s declaration of intent to cancel the contract on June 8, 2015, and thus, the Defendant was in the position of managing another’s business.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts or legal principles.

B. The punishment of the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination of misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles

A. On September 21, 2012, the Defendant entered into a sales contract of KRW 60 million with the victim B for the amount of KRW 414 square meters for the “land located in Pyeongtaek-gun C” at the office of a mutual infinite real estate intermediary located in Pyeongtaek-gun, Pyeongtaek-gun, Seowon-gun, Seowon-gun.

The Defendant received KRW 30 million from the injured party under the above contract and received KRW 10 million from the injured party’s intermediate payment around October 21, 2012. As such, the duty to receive KRW 20 million from the injured party around December 31, 2012, which is the remaining payment date, and to perform the registration procedure for the transfer of ownership of the said land, was incurred.

On July 12, 2015, the Defendant, in violation of the foregoing duties, set up a collateral security of KRW 40 million with the maximum amount of KRW 40 million at the registry office around July 12, 2015, and set up a collateral security of KRW 80 million with the maximum amount of claims to E around September 24, 2015.

Accordingly, the Defendant acquired property benefits equivalent to KRW 60 million, which is the market price of the above real estate, D and E, and suffered damages equivalent to the same amount as the victim.

B. In the event that the seller cancels the sales contract after selling real estate and then sells it again to a third party, even if the seller does not meet the requirements for the cancellation of the sales contract, the cancellation is legitimate.