Text
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
Reasons
1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the gist of the grounds of appeal, the defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay the victim D the remaining amount of KRW 136 million on January 26, 2010 to the seller's agent for seven parcels, including Pyeongtaek-si G, etc., and the victim did not have the intent or ability to pay the remaining amount of KRW 136 million on March 5, 2010. The court below found the victim guilty of the facts charged of this case on the ground that "the victim would pay the above KRW 136 million on March 5, 2010, which is the date of payment of the remaining amount." The victim would prepare a receipt in advance and deliver it to the purchaser after receiving a receipt of KRW 136 million on the same day from the victim, thereby allowing the victim to be exempted from the amount of KRW 136 million on the purchase price claim against I, and it could sufficiently be recognized that I acquired the above amount's pecuniary advantage.
2. Determination on the grounds for appeal
A. On November 9, 2009, the Defendant arranged the Victim D to sell 7 lots of 3,668 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by the Victim D, E (hereinafter “E”) to the Victim D Co., Ltd., Ltd., (hereinafter “E”), 1.58,240,000 won (hereinafter “instant real estate”).
On January 26, 2010, the Defendant: (a) at the E office located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Building 1623 on January 26, 2010; (b) at the E office, the fact was false; and (c) even if the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to pay KRW 136 million to the victim until March 5, 2010, the outstanding payment date, “I, the representative director of E, intends to terminate the instant sales contract; (d) the interest shall continue to exist; and (e) the Plaintiff shall have a long time invested in this real estate; and (e) the contract is maintained only when I receives any balance from the Plaintiff, the Defendant will receive KRW 136 million out of the remainder; and (e) there is a false statement to the effect that I would have received KRW 136 million out of the sales amount; and (e) the victim would have a face value of KRW 136 million in the name of the victim on the same day.