beta
Text
We reverse the judgment of the first instance court.
Imprisonment with prison labor for one year and without prison labor for a crime of violating the law of defense.
Reasons
1. Summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles and improper sentencing)
A. The conditional sales contract concluded on February 23, 2012 between the misunderstanding of the facts or legal principles and the Defendant and C (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) concluded on February 23, 2012 is a valid contract with the genuine intent. ① The Defendant is a person interested in the interest under the said sales contract who has filed a lawsuit for his/her own interest and has not promised to receive C and money, or other benefits, and thus does not constitute a crime of violation of the law of defense. ② The Defendant is obligated to complete the registration of transfer of ownership of six parcels of real estate, such as Hancheon-gun, Suwon (hereinafter “instant real estate”). Therefore, the Defendant’s complaint is not a false complaint.
B. The punishment sentenced by the first instance court (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.
2. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the first instance court and the first instance court’s duly admitted and investigated evidence as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts or legal principles, the instant sales contract concluded between the Defendant and C is null and void by means of a false false representation, and the Defendant’s promise to receive money, valuables, or other benefits from C constitutes a crime of violation of the law of defense and defense. The Defendant’s complaint constitutes a false accusation.
Therefore, we cannot accept the defendant's misunderstanding of the above facts or the argument of sentencing.
1) It is difficult to find out the motive for concluding a contract to sell the instant real estate to the Defendant for KRW 300 million, which is the amount much less than the market price, even though the market price of the instant real estate exceeded KRW 1 billion at the time the Defendant prepared the instant contract between C and C.
In addition, the market price of the real estate in this case at the time is approximately KRW 1.1 billion.