1. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to the Defendant G’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, the lower court was justifiable to have found the Defendant guilty of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) among the charges charged against the Defendant on the grounds indicated in its reasoning.

As alleged in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the status of custodian and intent of unlawful acquisition in embezzlement.

2. Examining the reasoning of the lower judgment as to Defendant A’s grounds of appeal in light of the evidence duly admitted by the lower court, it is justifiable to have determined that the lower court convicted the Defendant of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (excluding the portion of the lower judgment that was acquitted, dismissed, and exempted from punishment) among the charges charged against the Defendant on the grounds stated in its reasoning, and of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement

As alleged in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the proof of criminal facts required in a criminal trial.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.