The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The summary of the facts charged in this case is that the Defendant was awarded a bid for the total of 11 households, including No. 502, No. 202, No. 202, and No. 304 of the 204-dong 5-dong 5-dong 204, and No. 304 of the 3rd floor, from the K non-real estate trust (ju) around December 19, 2013, as the representative director of the KCA, specialized in real estate trade.

The defendant did not notify the victims of the fact with knowledge of the existence of KRW 6,809,910 as to No. 502 as to No. 502 as to No. 502 as to No. 204 as to the above real estate, KRW 4,366,740 as to No. 304 as to No. 304 as to the third floor, and KRW 17,986,56,560 as to No. 304 as to the above real estate, and KRW 6,809,910 as to No. 502 as to No. 502 as to No. 204 as to the disposition of default on common use as to each of the above real estate.

On January 2014, the Defendant sold the above real estate to the victims at around 17,986,560 won in total of the management expenses in arrears.

2. The deception as a requirement for fraud refers to all affirmative and passive acts that have a good faith and sincerity to comply with each other in the transactional relationship of property. It is sufficient to say that the deception does not necessarily mean a false representation as to the important part of a juristic act, and that it is the basis for judgment in order for the actor to take a disposition of property which he wishes by omitting the other party into mistake. Thus, in a case where it is recognized that the other party to the transaction would not have been engaged in the transaction if he received a notice of certain circumstances, he/she has a duty to notify the other party of such circumstances in advance in accordance with the principle of good faith. Nevertheless, the failure to give such notice is by deceiving the other party, and thus, it constitutes fraud (see Supreme Court Decision 201Da15488, Oct. 15, 2014).