In addition, even if the defendant has a claim against the company, he acquired the right to preferential payment by claiming it as a wage, so he acquired the profit.

Therefore, even though the defendant was guilty, the court below acquitted the defendant on the grounds that he cannot recognize the criminal intent or deception by deception. In this case, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts or misunderstanding the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the facts as shown in the court below's reasoning are acknowledged.

In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the above evidence, although the defendant notified the company in advance that he would claim expenses incurred by the company as wages and did not obtain the approval, the defendant did not receive the expenses from the company, and the head of the site office and the employees in charge of the field management did not know of this fact, and the K requested the company as wages in accordance with the business practices, so it is likely that the company would have been recognized as impliedly, as it is a claim for the company as wages in accordance with the business practices, and as long as the company received the above money from the company by reporting it to F, etc. before receiving it, and obtained the approval from F, etc., the company should actually approve it.