The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than two years and six months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the sale right is large.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles [the part on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) for one of the victim assets trust] A] Defendant in collusion with G, etc., and did not have planned to commit the crime by defraudation of the money used for the mass collection work, and did not participate in the crime as stated in this part of the facts charged.

The defendant requested G to return the funds required for the purchase of the right to sell lots, and provided data on the relevant households in order to specify the amount requested for the return, but there is no consultation with G, etc. on the specific plan for raising funds.

In other words, the defendant has only been interested in relianceing G and preventing the loss of those who provided funds necessary for the collection of the sale right, and there is no public contest with G, etc. or sharing the act of implementation with regard to the detailed method of compensating for such loss.

B) The following facts are sufficiently known: (a) the director of the I who participated in the resolution of the “collective civil petition planning agenda” of the I Co., Ltd. I (hereinafter referred to as “I”); (b) the Defendant, the representative of the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “F”) through sufficient explanation of AA, the head of the development headquarters of J (I’s asset management company; hereinafter referred to as “J”) and the explanation materials, etc. issued in advance, sold the right to sell the E apartment unit with the funds received from investors; (c) the fact that the investors of the funds necessary for the collection of the right to sell the apartment unit caused a group of complaints; (d) the fact that the investors of the funds required for the collection of the right to sell the apartment unit may cause a trouble in the future if they fail to solve the group civil petition urgently; and (e) the fact that new compilation of the essential project cost is necessary to solve the said group’s civil petition; and (e) the newly organized essential project cost was or will be used for the return of investors’ sales deposit through F.

Therefore, the defendant is G, etc.