The appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the evidence duly admitted by the first instance court maintained by the lower court, the following facts are revealed: (a) around June 2012, C entered into a restaurant from around August 2012 to operate the restaurant on the first floor of the building owned by C; and (b) the Defendant, while operating the restaurant independently from around August 2012, 20, to operate the restaurant; (c) the Defendant leased the building owned by the Defendant with a deposit of KRW 20 million, monthly rent of KRW 1.2 million; and (d) leased the building owned by the Defendant as a sum of KRW 50 million in total as the expenses for the cafeteria and operating expenses of the restaurant, and “a loan of KRW 50 million from the Defendant and repaid it by July 20, 2014.”

Therefore, for the purpose of having C take criminal punishment, the defendant attempted to acquire the defendant's property by acquiring the defendant's property, such as filing an application for compulsory auction on the house owned by the defendant on the ground of the false notarial deed in this case, although C did not lend KRW 50 million to the defendant.

The judgment of the court below convicting C of the facts charged of this case by submitting a written complaint to the purport that “A” is justifiable. Contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the rules of logic and experience and exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence

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