A. misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles, and violation of the rules of evidence, the Defendant merely received 250 million won as the agent of H, a contracting party to the management acquisition agreement, and did not keep it. It is not possible to reverse the above contract by publicly announcing the resolution of a temporary general meeting of shareholders for the appointment of a new director. Since the victim reversed the contract after the above public disclosure, the above reversal is contrary to the good faith principle. As such, the above actual inspection deposit is converted into the contract deposit and confiscated due to the victim’s non-performance of obligation, and thus, it is not recognized that the Defendant refused to return it and paid it at H’s request.

In addition, the defendant did not have the intention of embezzlement or illegal acquisition.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case is erroneous in misconception of facts, misapprehension of legal principles and

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (fine 4 million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court also asserted the same as above in the judgment of the lower court, i.e., facts as indicated in its reasoning, under the title “determination on the Defendant and the defense counsel’s assertion” in the judgment of the lower court, and (i) the Defendant, as the actual owner of G, actually operated G with one representative director from June 1, 201 to September 1, 201, with one representative director of G on the register of G, and was faced with financial difficulties, to transfer the management right of G to the victim and adjust related debts. In order to transfer the management right of H around January 19, 2012, the lower court concluded a provisional contract for acquisition of management right to transfer the management right of G to KRW 2.5 billion between H and I on behalf of the victim (hereinafter “instant contract”). (ii) According to the instant contract, the victim on the date of the instant contract, is a real inspection deposit, and the victim is a KRW 250 million.