The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The facts charged in the instant case reveal that “the Defendant is the person who was the owner of the land E at the time when he was a dead body D with a view to defending and serving as the heir of Australia. On September 6, 2008, the Defendant prepared a sales contract with F, a soil and stone collection business entity, on the said land, and stated that “any obstacle existing on the land for sale and purchase (such as a tomb, tombstone, etc.) shall be changed to a seller’s responsibility)” as the special agreement, and the Defendant prepared a written consent for the relocation of the grave with the same contents. However, the Defendant was only the heir of five graves other than D’s graves on the said land, and did not have the right to excavate or dispose of D’s graves at will because he was not the heir of Australia. Nevertheless, the Defendant expressed his intention to change the grave of D around September 7, 201. In the end, the Defendant ordered F to discover and manage it as above.”

2. The F’s statement to the effect that, consistent with evidence that the Defendant permitted F to excavate a dead D’s grave, the Defendant called the Defendant before the excavation of the grave, and there is a written consent for the relocation of the grave that the Defendant drafted to F to F.

The following facts are acknowledged according to the evidence duly adopted and examined by this Court.

① From around 2006, F has established a company G, Inc., Ltd., and has prepared for the business of collecting earth and rocks by developing macro-si, H, I, and J forests as stone.

② On September 6, 2008, F entered into a sales contract with the Defendant, the owner of the instant forest E (hereinafter “instant forest”). At the time of the said contract, F paid the down payment of KRW 315 million out of the purchase price, and the remainder was paid after obtaining permission to collect earth and stones from the competent administrative agency, and if so, F obtained permission.