The sentence of sentence shall be suspended for the defendant.

A. Each of the crimes described above Nos. 5 through 75, and Nos. 77 through 81, which are listed on the list of crimes attached to mistake of facts, was previously committed by H, the birth of the actual operator of the victim company F.

C. A fee that G received by the Defendant’s husband G for the convenience of issuing a tax invoice, which is the commission that G received from the victim’s company. Since the personal income does not have to belong to the victim’s company, it cannot be deemed that the act of transferring it to the Defendant or G account constitutes embezzlement. The remainder of each crime is that the Defendant properly performed his duties according to F’s instructions, and thus, the Defendant had the intent of embezzlement.

In spite of the fact that the court below was guilty of the facts charged in this case, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination on the assertion of mistake of facts 1) The following circumstances, i.e., the money indicated in the list of crimes Nos. 1 through 4, which the court below duly adopted and examined by the court below, do not have any evidence to deem that the money should be attributed to the defendant or his husband G, and the defendant permitted the victim company’s actual operator’s interest to recover and use the amount of KRW 60 million as stated in the list of crimes Nos. 2 and 3 as apartment purchase funds.

However, in the court of the court below, F refused the request of the defendant and G to provide financial support;

The defendant stated that G is entitled to receive the defendant's account from the corporate account to the defendant's account, and transfers each of the money stated in No. 1 through No. 4 of the crime sight table from the victim's corporate account to the defendant's account.