The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. According to all the evidence of the gist of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles), the court below erred in finding the Defendant not guilty of the facts charged of this case due to misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, although it can be acknowledged that the Defendant conspired with the victim A that “the building of this case does not have any legal problem.”

2. Determination

A. Around 18:00 on April 22, 2015, the Defendant and A entered into a lease agreement with the victim E who wishes to report the lease advertisement of the building of this case on the fourth floor (27 square meters) and ask him/her about the condition of the building by telephone, and the victim “this case’s building has no legal problems,” and A entered into a lease agreement with the victim at a coffee shop on the first floor of the same building at around 10:00 on the following day.

However, in fact, the instant building was subject to voluntary decision of commencement of auction in the Daejeon District Court on September 1, 2014 upon the application of the bank prior to the creditor, the creditor, not the public prosecution, and there was no means to allow the victim to normally use the fourth floor of the said building or to recover the lease deposit.

Nevertheless, the Defendant and A, by deceiving the victim by means of not notifying the victim of the above fact, entered into a real estate lease agreement with the victim for the fourth floor of the instant building with a deposit of KRW 50 million for the lease period of KRW 1,00,000,000 for the lease period of KRW 5 million for the same day and KRW 45 million for the remainder of May 29, 2015, respectively.

Accordingly, the defendant acquired the property of the victim in collusion with A.

B. The lower court’s judgment: (a) the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, i.e., the victim.