beta
Text
The part against Defendant A in the judgment of the first instance court shall be reversed.
Defendant
A shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of two years and six months.
Defendant .
Reasons
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant A (misunderstanding of facts and Sentencing in sentencing) committed fraud against Defendant Q Q (Article 1) (hereinafter “2016 senior group 5348”), following the agreement with Q Q, the Defendant cancelled the registration of collateral security established on two lots of land (2 lots of land (hereinafter “instant R and S land”), including the area of 7,450 square meters and 5,707 square meters of S Forest land, etc. prior to Innju-gun-gun-gun-gun, and paid KRW 40 million to Q as the down payment, and paid KRW 10 million as the check. The remainder of the remainder of the remainder of the remainder of the payment to CA and BT was paid as the price received by disposing of the instant R and land.
In full view of the process and result of the defendant's execution of the contract, the defendant's criminal intent to acquire the defendant Q is not recognized.
2) The Defendant was unable to cancel the registration of establishment of the right to collateral security established in the creditor AG with respect to six parcels, including Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, AA, etc. (hereinafter “instant X-gun”). This is because: (a) AD, AC, and AE representing W (hereinafter “V”) did not pay KRW 34 million out of the purchase price; (b) B did not arbitrarily use part of the purchase price received from V to cancel the registration of establishment of the right to collateral security; and (c) there was a lack of funds to cancel the registration of establishment of the right to collateral security by using part of the purchase price received from V.
On the other hand, while having knowledge of the establishment of a collateral security in the name of AG for the instant X-6 parcels of land, V concluded the said land sales contract and revised contract by deeming that there was no problem in the process of implementing the said land sales contract, and received the amount of KRW 10 million brokerage commission in the process, so the Defendant did not defraud the property by deceiving V.
3) Fraud against the victim AP (Article 4-A of 2016 Highest 9159) and the defendant AP are subject to the instant R.