The case holding that the conclusion of the transfer contract of the theater constitutes a fraudulent act where it was impossible to give the documents for the preparation of a protocol of settlement prior to the filing of a lawsuit for the execution of the master plan after the expiration of the lease term of the theater building, and it was also impossible to give the notice of the re-contract as the purpose of the theater, and it was actively cooperate to conclude the

The case holding that in the conclusion of the transfer contract of the theater, it is a fraudulent act that the contract was made by providing the documents for the preparation of a protocol of settlement prior to the filing of a lawsuit for the execution of the master plan after the expiration of the lease contract period of the theater building and actively cooperates with the conclusion of the re-lease contract as well as the notification of the re-lease contract as a

Article 347 of the Criminal Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gong1, 14113, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellee)

Defendant

Defendant

Attorney Kim Jong-chul

Seoul High Court Decision 91No2588 delivered on September 25, 1992

The appeal is dismissed.

We examine the grounds of appeal by the defense counsel (to the extent of supplement in case of the defendant's ground of appeal on the grounds of appeal not timely filed).

If the court below and the court of first instance examine the evidence maintained by the court below in comparison with records, it is just that the court below recognized facts as stated in its judgment, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts against the rules of evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit, incomplete hearing, or incomplete hearing.

Before entering into the transfer contract with the victim Kim Jong-jin, the defendant already agreed with the owner of the building of this case to allow the termination of the term of the lease contract with respect to the building of this case, which is the owner of the building of this case. The defendant delivered the documents for the preparation of the protocol of settlement prior to the filing for execution of the statement of this case, and did not inform the above Kim Jong-jin of the impossibility of re-lease contract as the purpose of the execution of the above contract, and did not actively cooperate with the above Kim Jong-jin so that the above Kim Jong-jin entered into the transfer contract with the defendant for the above career distribution and re-lease of this case. The purport of the judgment of the court below is that the guarantee of the period of the above transfer contract is an important element in the acquisition of the theater, so even if the above Kim Jong-jin's transfer contract was completed, it is impossible for the defendant to notify the contract of re-lease of the building of this case to the expiration date of the term of the lease, and if the defendant did not know that the above contract constitutes a fraudulent act of fraud.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Choi Jae-ho (Presiding Justice)