The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court’s judgment that acquitted the Defendants of fact-finding (the part concerning a crime without fault, 2014 order 9941) is erroneous in misunderstanding of fact (the specific grounds for appeal are as follows). B) Sentencing (the sentence of the lower court (the sentence of Defendant A, 2014 order 492) is unreasonable as it is too unfford that the sentence of the lower court (the sentence of 2 years of suspended execution in October, and community service 120 hours) is too unfford.

2. Judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts

A. The facts charged on the charge of not guilty (2014 senior group 9941) Defendant A is an attorney-at-law, and Defendant B is the chief executive officer of the law firm O.

On January 12, 2010, the Defendants: (a) at the office of the office of the 3rd floor law firm of the Seocho-gu Seoul National N Building in Seocho-gu, Seoul, the victim F and G are currently owned by the clan of the victim F and G with the land of 46,592 square meters in total of 46,592 square meters (hereinafter “the forest of this case”). However, upon delegation of the lawsuit by the descendants of the original owner, the Defendants filed a lawsuit against the said clan for the restoration of the title of a petition against the said clan by delegation of the lawsuit by the latter.

After that, the lawsuit may be won within one year with the delegation of the lawsuit from the grandchildren.

The market price of 1/2 of the shares of the above land is 1.4 billion won, and when the ownership is transferred after the inheritance, it is intended to purchase the shares in KRW 1.4 billion.

“A false representation was made.”

However, in fact, there was no intention or ability to file a lawsuit with the delegation of a lawsuit related to the land, such as the absence of confirmation of the intention of the lawsuit from the descendants of the original owner of the land to be the plaintiff.

As above, the Defendants deceptioned the victims, and received KRW 60 million from the victim G, and KRW 140 million from the victim F, respectively, as down payment.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired to obtain a total of KRW 200 million from the victims.

B. The lower court’s judgment (1) was recognized, 1 X was assessed on the instant forest land.

YThe latter is the descendants of the Z that succeeded to the property after the death of the Y, and it was found to be the Lawman in November 2009.