위증등
The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.
1. The money deposited to the bank account in the name of D in accordance with the investment contract of this case was money for the execution of construction work. Although the money deposited is used only for the strictly limited purpose according to the terms and conditions of the contract, the defendant's use of it constitutes embezzlement by deviating from the limited purpose, and therefore, the court below acquitted all of the facts charged of this case, although perjury is established together, the court below acquitted the defendant of all of the facts charged of this case. The judgment of the court below is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts, which affected
2. The facts charged in this case and the judgment of the court below
A. On December 16, 200, the Defendant appeared at the 1478 Y office in Daejeon-dong, Daejeon-dong on December 16, 2009 to acquire funds from the victim C with D, E, F, and land and buildings located in the Cheongju-si, Haju-si, and to distribute profits after the sale of the land located in the same J., upon delegation of the duty to disburse business funds, keep the proceeds of sale, and dispose of the proceeds of sale. While he kept the NA account in the name of D (K), he arbitrarily extracted KRW 30 million from 200,000 to 30,000,000,000 won from 20,000,000 won to 30,000,000 won to 30,000,000 won to 30,000,000 won to 20,000 won to 20,000,000 won to 20,00.