The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

With respect to the facts constituting a crime in the judgment of the court below, 1) as stated in the judgment of the court below misunderstanding the facts of the reasons for appeal or misunderstanding the legal principles, 2) as to the crime No. 2 as stated in the judgment of the court below, 1) the defendant deceiving Co-Defendant B (hereinafter “B”) of the court below to acquire profits equivalent to the amount secured by the right of lease by deceiving Co-Defendant B of the court below (hereinafter “B”) and did not commit an act in breach of trust in collusion with B, but 2) the time at which each lease contract was issued was issued, and there was a crime committed as a new crime every time with the sales agency operated by the

Nevertheless, the court below found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged for the reasons indicated in its holding. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion

The punishment sentenced by the court below to the defendant (four years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

Judgment

In light of the following circumstances, which can be acknowledged by the record as to the assertion that the act of breach of trust was not committed in collusion with B, B provided the original copy of the lease agreement of the G commercial building No. 119, 123 and 126 (hereinafter each commercial building is specified in the form of “19 commercial building”) to the Defendant by deceiving the Defendant that “I will pay the loan by selling the lease agreement of each commercial building” was not committed.

There is no room to see.

① On August 201, the Defendant received a loan as security for the repayment of the deposit money for a commercial building from the Victim L Saemaul Bank (hereinafter referred to as the “victim”) (the name of H), 114 (the name of H), 119 (H), 123 (the name of the mother), 126 (H), 219 (the name of the wife), and 219 (J), and the interest for the period of 2015 (the interest for the period of 2015) was paid to police officers.

(2) On October 2012, the Defendant received the original copy of the lease contract for commercial buildings No. 114 from B from around October 2012.