The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

In light of the above legal principles, the Defendant’s payment of construction price was made to the victim DEL case, and even thereafter, the Defendants issued bills and checks and delivered them to the victim DEL case.

This means that in March 30, 201, I did not settle the construction cost in the same manner as I claimed in March 30, 201.

(4) The following contents are stated at the lower end of the “The receipt status of progress payment for the E Bank” (Evidence No. 59 pages):

- On April 25, 2011 - The construction cost was adjusted to the progress payment for a bank as described above and vice versa on April 25, 2011, and 2.5 million won out of the amount of KRW 1.1 billion in cash as stated above, the owner borrowed from the owner in cash and the owner confirms that he/she is a promissory note (or note) as follows:

The term "Promise bill" 1) 150 million won on June 27, 2011 - the amount of 100 million won on April 25, 2011 - the payment date of 125,374,00 won on May 6, 201 - the last balance of construction cost of 3) 125,374,00 won on May 10, 201 - the amount of 250 million won on April 6, 201 - the amount of 100,000 won on April 25, 201 - the amount of 30,00,000 won on April 30, 205 (the above amount of 4,000,000 won on August 30, 2011) appears to have been issued at 205,000 won on the victim's face value per 4,015.

⑤ According to the above methods of payment and settlement of the construction cost between the Defendant and the victim DEL case, the victim DEL case was transferred to the Defendant on March 30, 201, and KRW 120 million out of KRW 320 million, and KRW 50 million remitted on March 31, 201, and KRW 80 million remitted on April 1, 201, and KRW 10 million from the previous year.