The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the facts charged is that the Defendant: (a) around November 3, 2009, at the house of Suwon-si B Housing Co., Ltd. in Suwon-si; (b) through D, the Defendant succeeds to the ownership of the Etel before December 10, 2009, KRW 45 million for the obligations established in the Etel; and (c) sells the EM H 8,264 square meters (hereinafter “H forest”) in the Gyeonggi-gu Gyeonggi-do in which the Defendant actually owned the Etel and paid the remainder of KRW 60 million from May 6, 2010 to May 6, 2010; and (d) by concluding a false agreement with the victim to exchange the Etel with the Etel. If the remainder is not available, the Defendant would transfer the ownership of the H forest and land.”

However, the facts are as follows: “I, the owner of H forest, purchased the land with the view to having the ownership of the entire house, but did not have any error; even if the damage was done, I would like to arrange even if I purchased the land on the part of the Defendant. He was aware that only the bank loan would succeed to the ownership without any additional money, and even though I knew that there was no value as the land for which only the actual value was established, the H forest was concealed and entered into an exchange contract with the victim. On December 8, 2009, before I completed the registration of transfer of ownership for Etel from the victim, he had transferred the H forest without any additional money on the condition of the succession. Therefore, the Defendant did not have any intent or ability to pay 60 million won to the victim for the transfer of ownership to the J without any additional money.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, by deceiving the victim through D, obtained on December 10, 2009 the registration of transfer of ownership for the Etel in the name of K and obtained the registration of transfer from the victim.

2. The lower court’s determination may be based on the records.