The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged: (a) around June 12, 2014, the Defendant decided to purchase “Felher” under the name of E located in Ma, Gangwon-do (hereinafter “1 sales contract”); (b) paid KRW 100 million to E; (c) the Defendant loaned KRW 100 million to G, who is the owner of the Moel, in the process of purchasing the Moel, and offered security to the Defendant; (d) but upon the termination of the contract due to G’s failure to provide security, the Defendant was willing to unfurd down the down payment to G to compensate for damages arising from the termination of the contract; and (e) requested E to the effect that “The Defendant prepared a receipt to the effect that he paid part of the down payment with KRW 20 million,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000 won, which is KRW 160,000,000,00).

When the Defendant came to know of the fact that he sold the above Moel to the victim I and J (hereinafter “second sale contract”) around November 18, 2014, the Defendant filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of a fraudulent act against the victims under the above H’s name, stating that “The purchase contract entered into between E and the victims shall be revoked within the limit of KRW 72 million, and the victims shall be paid to the Defendant,” and the Defendant filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of the fraudulent act (Seoul High Court Branch Branch 2015Da39232) with the Suwon District Court Decision 2014Da319111 and the sentence above, which held on October 16, 2015, the Defendant did not have a contract deposit claim amounting to KRW 60 million against E.