The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

except that this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. As to the part of the judgment of not guilty among the prosecutor (1) of the court below's erroneous determination of facts, the court below found the defendant not guilty of this part of the facts charged, despite the fact that the defendant, around April 17, 2009, under the evidence adopted by the court below, knew the victim that he would have been ordered to undertake the D development project without any proposal and received a total of KRW 230 million, and obtained it by deceit,

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. Defendant (1) Of the judgment of conviction of mistake of facts, the court below found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, despite the fact that the Defendant received KRW 200 million from the victim on September 18, 2009 was merely a simple loan and did not receive the name that he would receive some I reclamation projects. However, the court below erred in misunderstanding of facts.

(2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

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

A. Around April 17, 2009, the Defendant stated that “Around April 17, 2009, the Defendant would create D in the O hotel business room in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government N, and would allow the victim C to receive a subcontract for a development project. It may be possible for the Defendant to undertake construction works as well as the representative director of the PP corporation, etc., who is well aware of it. 5% of the price for the contract for construction.”

However, even if the victim receives money from the victim, there was no intention or ability to have the victim get the victim to enter into a subcontract for the D&D development project.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, as seen above, deceiving the victim and received KRW 50 million from the victim to the victim's place as the main owner of the D Development Project in order to execute the D Development Project. Around that time, the Defendant was issued a total of KRW 230 million from June 25, 2009 and acquired it by deception.

(b) the defendant;