The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The judgment of the court below that held that the defendant acquired the construction price by mistake from the victim even though he/she had the intent and ability to pay the construction price when he/she was responsible for raising the victim's land owned by the defendant, is erroneous and adversely affected the conclusion of the

B. The Defendant asserts that the sentence imposed by the lower court (a fine of three million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Ex officio determination, the prosecutor applied for amendments to a bill of amendment to the indictment with the purport that the prosecutor did not have the intent or ability to pay the price" as stated in the 6th of the previous facts charged at the trial. Since the subject of adjudication was changed by this court’s permission, the judgment of the court below was no longer maintained.

However, even if the above reasons for ex officio destruction exist, the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court within the scope of determining the modified facts charged, and this is examined in the following

B. On September 8, 2010, the altered charge No. 1, the Defendant stated that “the Defendant would make a lump sum payment of the construction cost in October 20 of the same year when the Corporation completed the construction work,” to the victim D who embling work on the part of the Defendant’s arguments owned by the Defendant located in Scheon-si Co., Ltd. on the following day. However, the Defendant had no intent or ability to pay the said payment even if the victim embling work on the above argument because of a large amount of debt at the time of the construction work. The Defendant deceivings the victim and caused the victim to perform the work equivalent to approximately KRW 8,800,00,00, and did not pay the said amount, thereby obtaining property benefits equivalent to the said amount. 2) The lower court’s judgment prior to the alteration of the charges charged.