The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant, who received a verbal delegation from other co-inheritors, of the authority to dispose of HY and three parcels of land (hereinafter “instant land”) from the Chungcheongbuk-gun and the other co-inheritors, and received a conclusive delegation of the authority to dispose of household affairs.

Even if it cannot be seen, in light of the various circumstances at the time, the defendant has the right to dispose of the land at issue.

Since there was a considerable reason to believe that there was no intention to defraudation.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. On September 29, 2014, the Defendant: (a) at D’s house, a neighboring resident in Chungcheongnamyang-gun C around 11:00 on September 29, 2014; and (b) to the victim E, “The father F and G were drank; (c) his father F and her mother returned to her father; and (d) 4,397 square meters of land (former, river, river) registered in the name of her parent was delegated by all heirs to her right to sell and purchase the land; (d) so there is no problem in selling the land.

If the down payment and the intermediate payment are paid first, the documents on the registration of ownership transfer shall be kept at the same time.

“The victim entered into a contract to sell the said real estate in the purchase price of KRW 57 million with a false statement.”

However, in fact, the Defendant did not have any intention or ability to register the transfer of ownership of the above real estate in accordance with the above agreement, even if he received the purchase amount from the injured party, because he did not have been delegated the authority to dispose of the said real estate from other members.

As such, the Defendant, by deceiving the victim, received a total of KRW 5.5 million from the victim to the Saemaul Treasury account in the name of the Defendant on September 22, 2014, and received KRW 25.5 million as the down payment on October 20, 2014, and acquired KRW 25.5 million as the intermediate payment on October 20, 2014, respectively.

B. The lower court’s judgment.