The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

The charge of evading compulsory execution among the facts charged in the instant case shall be acquitted.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as the witness G, N, I, P, and Q’s respective statements in the original trial court and sales contract and account transaction documents submitted by G, the court below acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged on the ground that there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the facts charged. However, the court below acquitted the Defendant of this part of the charges on the ground that there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the facts charged.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles and affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The lower court’s sentence (one million won of fine) on the ground of unreasonable sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

B. (1) Although there is no obligee’s right, which serves as the basis of mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, and the obligor’s provisional registration is not a crime of evading compulsory execution against the obligee, the lower court erred by misapprehending the relevant facts or by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of evading compulsory execution, thereby convicting the obligee of this part of the charges

(2) The lower court’s sentence (one million won of fine) on the ground of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The summary of this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant purchased the forest land E (hereinafter “the forest of this case”) in the name of Gangseo-gun F, the husband, in cooperation with D, and entered into a contract with the victim G to sell the forest of this case for KRW 2.1 million on April 24, 2008.

The terms and conditions of the contract were the defendant's disability of five graves at the entrance of the forest of this case upon the receipt of part payments.

However, on July 2008, the Defendant’s failure to implement the relocation of the grave that was promised to receive down payment and intermediate payment from the victim, saying that the Defendant would transfer 30,000 won necessary for the relocation of the said grave to the N who arranged the instant forest sale and purchase contract.