The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

except that this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts: On May 2008, 2008, Defendant 1, a victim I, on the ground V (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) on two lots, such as Seoul Jung-gu, Jung-gu, Seoul.

) No. 236 and 246 of the second floor (hereinafter “instant stores”).

[Attachment] 247, 250 and 251 (hereinafter “K’s commercial buildings”) in the name of K, the wife of the victim, instead of transferring its ownership.

(2) The lower court’s sentence (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable, because it was so unfair that the instant store was transferred to another company, and the application for the commencement of compulsory auction against K stores was withdrawn, and the victim did not join the company.

B. On August 14, 2008, the prosecutor (with regard to the portion not guilty of the lower judgment) prepared a promissory note No. 1.5 billion won at face value, and September 30, 2008 at the time of payment (hereinafter “instant No. notarial deed”) in return for the Defendant to take over the management right of the instant commercial building. However, on October 8, 2008, the instant No. notarial deed became null and void since the Defendant reversed the above management right transfer contract.

Therefore, the defendant applied for compulsory execution on the notarial deed of this case which is null and void, thereby starting the execution of fraud.

2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court as to the prosecutor’s assertion, the Defendant was trying to acquire the right to manage the instant commercial building by holding a management body meeting. Therefore, it is difficult to conclude that the Defendant applied for compulsory execution on March 25, 2009, knowing that the instant notarial deed is null and void, or that the Defendant applied for compulsory execution on the said notarial deed with knowledge that the notarial deed is null and void, and that there is no other evidence to acknowledge the same, the Prosecutor’s assertion is rejected.

A. H from April 2008, the instant case.