The defendant shall be innocent.

1. On September 25, 2009, the summary of the facts charged, the victim B entered into a sales contract for KRW 1,414,600,00 with respect to the defendant's apartment building C in Busan Metropolitan City on September 25, 2009, and on October 12, 2009, the sales contract was concluded for KRW 1,429,100,000 with respect to the above apartment building E.

On September 25, 2009, the Defendant requested a premium for the above apartment sale contract to the victim, and received KRW 20 million from the premium for the above apartment unit D to the G bank account in F’s name (H). On October 15, 2009, the Defendant received KRW 30 million from the premium for the above apartment unit E and transferred on October 23, 2009 by dividing it into the G bank account (Account Number: I) in the name of the Defendant and the K bank account (Account Number: L) in the name of the Defendant’s wife on October 23, 2009.

However, even if the above apartment bond 2 was not paid with premium in the unsold state at the time, the defendant was paid 50 million won in total as premium by deceiving the victim that the defendant should pay premium in advance to the preferred M employees even if the sales contract was not possible.

On February 16, 2015, the victim received a complaint stating the above contents to the Seoul Southern District Court of Yangcheon-gu, Seoul, Seoul, 390,000 won as a brokerage commission or brokerage fee, and some of the 30 million won deposited by the plaintiff to the president of the brokerage business was included in the case of claiming unjust gains. Accordingly, the defendant paid to the defendant (the plaintiff) the brokerage fee to the defendant on March 31, 2015, the document prepared on June 5, 2015, the document prepared on July 17, 2015, and the document submitted on August 20, 2015, the plaintiff (the victim) paid 50 million won to the defendant (the plaintiff) as a broker fee or brokerage fee. In relation to subparagraph E, some of the 30 million won deposited by the plaintiff to the defendant (the plaintiff) was not related to the defendant's cash brokerage fee to the defendant (the defendant).