Defendant

All appeals by prosecutors are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 피고인( 사실 오인) 1) 피고인은 F으로부터 주식회사 동아 전력( 이하 ‘ 동아 전력’ 이라 한다 )에 담보를 제공해 주면 F이 이를 담보로 동아 전력의 공사를 수주하여 그 수익금 중 일부를 피해자 회사에 줄 것이고, 만일 공사 수주가 이루어지지 않으면 곧바로 담보를 회수할 수 있다는 꾐에 빠져, 피해자 회사에 경제적 도움이 될 것으로 생각하고 판시 이 사건 토지를 동아 전력 앞으로 근저당권 설정을 해 준 것이기에, 피고인이 이 사건 토지를 동아 전력에 담보로 제공하였다고

on the ground that there was a criminal intent of breach of trust.

subsection (b) of this section.

2) At the time of the establishment of a senior mortgage in the name of East Asia, due to the establishment of a senior mortgage at the time of the establishment of a senior mortgage in the name of East Asia, not only did not have any remaining collateral value but also did not have any collateral value, and thus, it was possible to cancel the land at any time due to the lack of collateral

shall not be deemed to exist.

B. Prosecutor 1) The senior mortgage in the name of creditor S, which was established on the instant land, shall be excluded from the collateral value in calculating the remaining collateral value in the most recent period during which there is no secured debt.

Therefore, with respect to the Defendant’s breach of trust in excess of KRW 500,000,00, the collateral value, that is, property gains, at the time of establishing the right to collateral in the future of the East Asia’s land, should be subject to the charge of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (ref

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (three years of suspended sentence for two years of imprisonment) is too minor.

2. Determination

A. 1) On the Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts, the Defendant asserted that there was no voluntary intention on the part of the Defendant, and at the lower court, the Defendant asserted the same content as the Defendant alleged the above facts.