The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for six months and the second crime of the decision of the court below as to the first crime of the court below.

A. Compared to misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles 1) E does not lend or invest KRW 100 million to the victimized company by purchasing the shares of the Victim D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim”) as indicated in the judgment of the court below, and E personally lends KRW 100 million to the Defendant.

B) Around September 13, 2006, H had already acquired the shares of the victimized company and owned H. Since the sale price of the shares of the victimized company paid by H was the ownership of H, not the victimized company. Since H and the Defendant agreed at around 2009 to use the victimized company at around 50:50, each share was in the same business relationship at the time of commencing the business, and the Defendant’s use of the victimized company, and eventually, the Defendant’s share delivery to E is the ownership of the Defendant. Accordingly, if the ownership of the deposited shares was transferred to the trustee and the trustee’s arbitrary disposal was not constituted embezzlement. According to H’s legal statement, if the Defendant used KRW 100 million for the personal purpose and later used the damaged company for the personal purpose, the Defendant’s share purchase price of KRW 200 million at the expense of the victimized company and KRW 200 million at KRW 700,000,0000,000,000,000,000 won.)