The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal in this case is practically impossible to develop the forest land of this case, and it is difficult to obtain profit from the market price within a considerable period of time as a blind site. However, the Defendants actively packed various information formed around the victim at the time without securing clear information and the grounds in advance and explained as stated in the facts of the charge as if the market price was realized almost little, and the Defendants had the victim purchase the forest land at a higher price than the normal market price than the normal market price. The Defendants’ act is sufficient to view it as a deception in fraud.

In addition to the fact that the Defendants managed the business activities of employees through the business conference, the meeting ceremony, the business instruction and education, etc., and in addition to the employees’ instructions, the Defendants were acknowledged to have engaged in the conduct of deceptions, instruction and participation in the conduct of deceptions, when they instructed the employees to deceive the location of the land or recognized the details of deceptions in advance.

However, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendants is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts or legal principles.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in this case is that Defendant A is the representative director of the Investment Bank Co., Ltd. E (hereinafter “E”), which is a movable company in the planning department, and Defendant B is a person who uses the position of “all-time” as a director in the company of E.

After managing the above E, purchasing at a low price of 7,201m2 (hereinafter “the instant forest”), the Defendants conspired to acquire money by deceiving the victim as if he could obtain gains gains profits from the market price of several times by developing the said real estate as an applicant company and administrative work in the nearest city where the said real estate was completed.

Defendant

B determines to purchase the forest land of this case and the selling price thereof.