The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) The Defendant did not have any mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal doctrine that misleads the victim and did not have any criminal intent to acquire the victim by deception. The Defendant is the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”).

The Defendant believed that the acquisition price was almost prepared by L, S, etc. to take over KRW 10 billion. The Defendant, upon the introduction of D, concluded a contract for acquisition of the shares and management rights of the instant company (hereinafter “instant contract”).

The author tried to talk about the case, but tried to make an investment of 2 billion won from the victim.

The Defendant merely stated to the victim that “an investment of KRW 2 billion shall be registered as an internal director and received the shares of the instant company corresponding to the investment amount, and upon the completion of the acquisition of the instant company, the instant company’s share price would rapidly increase and thus be seen as considerable profits from the market price.” The Defendant would provide “vehicles and corporate cards.”

There is no rumor that there is a false statement.

On May 17, 2017, the Defendant paid 300 million won equivalent to the victim’s share among the down payment of KRW 1 billion under the instant contract, on behalf of the Defendant, and the victim deposited the amount equivalent to the above KRW 300 million, which the Defendant paid to the Defendant, from May 24, 2017 to June 2, 2017.

As the Defendant paid the down payment to the victim on May 18, 2017, it was publicly announced that the proposal to appoint the victim as an internal director of the instant company was submitted at the general meeting of shareholders of the instant company on May 18, 2017. However, since the victim failed to pay the remainder of the 2 billion won agreed in addition to the above 300 million won, the Defendant withdrawn the proposal to appoint the victim as an internal director from the side of the instant company.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles that found guilty of the facts charged.

2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, etc.) is too unreasonable.