The part against Defendant G, I, J, and K shall be reversed.

Defendant

G KRW 3,000,000, Defendant.

A. Defendant G1) The judgment of the court below which convicted Defendant G (Defendant G1) on the basis of a mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principle, and even if the Defendant voluntarily released the Mack w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w w

B. Defendant I’s imprisonment (two years of imprisonment, additional collection charges 20 million won) is too unreasonable.

C. Defendant K1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles ) Defendant was aware that the goods supplied by J are stolen.

B) Of the annual 13th of the crime sight table (13) annexed to the lower judgment, the Defendant was the first offender, and the purchase of goods from J was actually 19 months from September 2008 to April 2010.

In light of the fact that the trading volume is 18 times only, and the trading volume is low in light of the trading volume handled by the defendant, and it reaches about 94% of the actual trading price, the judgment of the court below that recognized the defendant habitually is unfair.

2) The sentence of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution, community service 200 hours) is too unreasonable. D. Prosecutor 1 of the lower court’s judgment on the following grounds: Defendant I, J (one year and six months of imprisonment), and K’s each sentence is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant and the prosecutor ex officio, the prosecutor examined the following facts charged: ① As to the part of the facts charged in the instant case, the following facts charged are “preliminary charges”; the name of the crime; the term “occupational embezzlement”; the term “Articles 356, 355(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act” is added to the applicable provisions of the Act; ② the name of the crime as to Defendant I.