A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

Punishment of the crime

On April 29, 2008, the Defendant was delegated by five landowners, such as C, and entered into a real estate sales contract for C, etc. with the victim F and C, which is owned by the victim F and C, and entered into a real estate sales contract for the land, G, H through I, J, K, and L. Accordingly, the Defendant was transferred KRW 450 million to a foreign exchange bank account in the name of the Defendant for the same day as the down payment. On May 14, 2008, the Defendant was transferred KRW 300 million to the same account as the intermediate payment. As such, on July 31, 2008, the remainder payment was received and the victim transferred the complete ownership without any legal restriction.

Nevertheless, around June 2, 2008, the Defendant borrowed KRW 150 million from M as collateral and offered N or I forest land among the above land as collateral, and around June 3, 2008, the Defendant completed the registration of the establishment of a mortgage over the maximum debt amount of KRW 200 million equivalent to the maximum debt amount of KRW 200 million with M as collateral.

As a result, the defendant acquired financial benefits equivalent to the above collateral value and caused the same loss to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's oral statement (the third trial date);

1. Statement of the police officer concerning theO;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a real estate sales contract, a full certificate of registered matters (No. 5), a transfer certificate, a confirmation, and a land sale delegation certificate;

1. Article 35(2) and (1) of the relevant statutory provisions on criminal facts, grounds for sentencing a sentence of imprisonment [the scope of recommending punishment] [the grounds for sentencing a sentence of imprisonment] 2 types (10 million won or more or less or less than 500 million won) [the sentence] / [the decision of sentence] Defendant’s crime of this case, actual voluntary auction was conducted due to the Defendant’s crime of this case. As such, the victim company failed to refund the amount of the purchase price, the damage was not recovered, and the damage was not recovered, and the circumstances of the Defendant actively endeavored for this purpose were not observed by the victim company.