The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor of the grounds of appeal, it is acknowledged that the Defendant entered into a contract for construction of a road packed between the victims and a contract for construction of an urban water supply site, which requires a special agreement with the victims. Nevertheless, in light of the fact that the victims were punished by the Defendant and the instant prosecution was instituted, and that some roads and water supply facilities were installed only when the victims were indicted and the instant prosecution was instituted, the Defendant was paid the purchase price from the beginning with no intention or ability to perform the contract properly.

It is reasonable to view it.

2. In light of the following circumstances revealed through the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the lower court, the evidence presented by the prosecutor alone, which led to the Defendant’s criminal intent to acquire the purchase price.

The prosecutor’s assertion is without merit, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

① After entering into each of the instant contracts with the victims, the Defendant: (a) divided D land at the time of Ansan on October 2014; and (b) registered the transfer of ownership of the relevant site to the victims on October 20, 2014; and (c) completed the registration of the transfer of ownership of the relevant site, which may be deemed the principal obligation of the victims under each of the instant contracts.

② In addition, the Defendant obtained permission to engage in development activities for the purpose of building sites for detached houses and entrance roads into and exit from the inner market in September 2014 with respect to three parcels of land, the Defendant constructed a road to ensure vehicle traffic and constructed sewage pipes by installing a road by starting a stop work on the access road site and installing a miscellaneous stone. Furthermore, whether the road opened by the Defendant complies with the standards of related Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Building Act, etc., the Defendant was also able to perform the sales contract incompletely even if the road opened by the Defendant, regardless of whether it conforms to the standards of

(3) Victims C have been purchased.