The judgment below

Of them, the part against Defendant A shall be reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and three months.

Defendant

B.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (1) The misunderstanding of the legal doctrine and the misunderstanding of the legal doctrine are merely the brokerage of a real estate exchange contract between A and F, and there is no means to mediate the compromise.

Nevertheless, the defendant received profits and arranged arbitration or civil reconciliation between A and F.

The judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of violation of the jurisdiction of the defense industry is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles and misapprehension of facts.

2) The sentence of the lower court (ten months of imprisonment, two years of suspended sentence) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. As to the fraud against the victim F among the facts charged against the Defendant A, the Defendant did not have any capacity or intent to pay KRW 30 million to the victim, and there was no agreement to provide the victim with another real estate as a substitute for the payment of KRW 330 million to the victim instead of the above KRW 330 million.

Nevertheless, the court below found the existence of an agreement on satisfaction of the above substitute and found the defendant not guilty of the above facts charged erred by mistake in the facts.

2) The lower court’s sentence (one hundred months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) against an unfair defendant in sentencing is too uneasy and unfair.

2. Judgment on Defendant B’s assertion

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s determination on the assertion of mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine are as follows: (i) Defendant A mediated a real estate exchange agreement between F and K on May 2004; (ii) Defendant A offered the transfer of the real estate owned by K to Defendant A; (iii) Defendant A demanded compensation for damages due to the failure to obtain the transfer of the real estate owned by K to file a lawsuit against Defendant A on the ground that the provisional disposition of the said exchange agreement was established; and (iv) Defendant B was delegated by F with the right to resolve all civil and criminal issues arising from the nonperformance of the said exchange agreement.