A. In fact-misunderstanding and legal principles, the goods supply contract for the cable water system concluded between the Defendant and the victim (main owner) E (hereinafter “victim company”) (hereinafter “instant supply contract”) includes education on the installation of the system and the operation of the system and the leases of 2.0 cable water system, but the victim company did not perform these obligations.

In light of the above part that the victim company did not perform, the value of the goods referred to in paragraphs (1) through (6) (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the goods of this case”) that are embezzled as stated in the facts charged of this case shall not exceed 15,84,49 won.

B. Since the sum of down payment and intermediate payment paid by the Defendant to the victim company exceeds 15,891,759 won and the value of the instant goods embezzled by the Defendant, the Defendant’s act of transferring ownership after offering the instant goods as security does not constitute embezzlement, or there was an intention of unlawful acquisition by the Defendant.

It is difficult to see it.

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

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (the imprisonment of eight months, the suspension of the execution of two years, and the community service order of 120 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below as to the assertion that the calculation of embezzlement amount is unlawful, the total value of the pertinent goods is practically difficult to calculate the individual value of the pertinent goods. As such, the amount equivalent to the main goods that the Defendant did not offer as security from total amount of KRW 292,498,538 according to the supply contract of this case (total amount of KRW 136,654,039 = 22,50,000,000, 84,154,039 won for the electronic parts replacement of the operating electronic parts of the system of KRW 22,50,000, as alleged by the defendant.