A. The Defendant, after receiving a request from F to lend the name for the purchase of a motor vehicle from F, received KRW 1,784,00 from the F for the said purchase price, and was not aware of the victim at all.

In addition, under consultation with F, 838,200 won out of the above money as the principal owner of the said money was deposited into Abandoned Vehicle, and 12 million won was used individually, and the remaining 5 million won was acquired from the victim's telephone and returned all of them. Accordingly, the defendant did not have the intention of embezzlement.

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

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances that can be recognized by the court below as a whole by taking account of the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below as to the assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles, i.e., ① the victim consistently stated to the effect that it corresponds to the facts charged at the investigation agency, ② the victim made a telephone conversation with the police, ② the Defendant made a statement to the effect that “the Defendant was entering the initial promise and withdrawn and used the automobile purchase price without the victim or his own permission” (Evidence No. 69 of the record), ③ the Defendant was all admitted to the crime in the court of the court of the court below, such as the Defendant’s refusal to return money without justifiable reasons while keeping the money for the victim as stated in the facts charged, and it can be sufficiently recognized that the Defendant embezzled the above KRW 12 million. The above assertion of mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles that

B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, the instant case is not somewhat weak, and all of the conditions of sentencing are taken into account, including the fact that the Defendant, after the confession in the original trial, denies all the crimes and does not appear against the Defendant, and that the Defendant did not agree with the victim.