The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, fraud regarding land E shall be acquitted.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts (the guilty part of the judgment of the court below) Defendant received KRW 16 million in total from G in terms of the cancellation cost of provisional attachment and the registration cost, on the date stated in this part of the facts charged, but the said money was used under the above circumstances. Since the money was used under the above circumstances, there was no deception of G. At the time, the Defendant had self-sufficient power at that time, thereby rescinding the provisional attachment or the right to collateral security, thereby omitting indication of the administrative district other than L/W E in Gyeonggi-gu

The lower court convicted the Defendant of this part of fraud on a different premise, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment. (2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (eight months of imprisonment, two years of suspended execution, two years of social service, 200 hours of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, such as a mistake of facts (not guilty part of the judgment of the court below) from the investigative agency to the court of original trial, a consistent G’s statement, and a land sales contract consistent with the G’s statement, etc., the Defendant, as stated in this part of the facts charged, sold part of the E preceding 760 square meters to G, by deceiving G in a manner that did not notify G of the fact that the establishment registration of a mortgage was completed on the said land, and by deceiving G from G in sum 66.7 million won. Therefore, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of this part of the fraud on a different premise is erroneous and erroneous, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. 2) The judgment of

2. Judgment on the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts

A. The Defendant in this part of the facts charged is a person who operated C Co., Ltd., a real estate consulting company.

On February 11, 2015, the Defendant is at the C Co., Ltd. office located near Gangnam-gu Seoul Station.