The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts as to the primary facts charged and misunderstanding of the legal principles) The defendant was set up on the land at F, the representative of the victim, as to the 2620/2640 shares owned by the defendant among the G land in Incheon-gun G land (hereinafter “instant land”).

By issuing documents necessary to cancel provisional registration of the right to claim the transfer of H ownership and a land transaction contract with the victim's son as a purchaser, the victim transferred the right to manage and dispose of the instant land to the victim. According to delegation by the victim, K et al. (hereinafter "K et al.") was in the position of managing the affairs of the victim, such as selling the instant land to three persons, etc. (hereinafter "K et al.").

Nevertheless, the Defendant entrusted the sale and purchase of the instant land because the victim owned the instant land or was practically authorized to manage and dispose of it.

The lower court determined that the Defendant could not be recognized as “a person who administers another’s business” on the grounds that it cannot be seen that the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts concerning “a person who administers another’s business” or by misapprehending the relevant legal doctrine.

2. Determination

A. The prosecutor of the amendment of the indictment shall keep the facts of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (influence) which the court below acquitted in the trial, as the primary charge, and shall read the name of the crime as "the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (influence)", and the applicable provision as "Article 3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes and Article 347 (1) of the Criminal Act", and

1) As stated in Paragraph 1, an application for amendment to a bill of amendment was filed, and this court permitted the application and changed the subject of the judgment.

The following changes are still the primary charges subject to the judgment of this Court, regardless of the changes in the subject of the judgment.