Part concerning Defendant A and C shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor of one year and six months, and Defendant C.

A. Defendant A1’s misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles) Violation of the Act on the Regulation and Punishment, etc. of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds / [Attachment] The part Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 10 in the crime sight table / [Attachment] 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 10 were divided and remitted by Defendant A to the creditor and his family’s account for the purpose of repaying his/her own debt. Thus,

shall not be deemed to exist.

B) The crime of occupational breach of trust in the instant case is merely a single crime committed by Defendant C, and the Defendant A conspired or did not participate in the crime.

2) The sentence of the lower court that is unfair in sentencing (2 years of imprisonment, additional collection of KRW 183,00,000) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant C (Cheating in Sentencing)’s punishment of the lower court (one year and three months of imprisonment) is excessively unreasonable.

(c)

According to the prosecutor's misunderstanding of facts (defendant A and B), Defendant B and AE's statements are acknowledged that Defendant A received KRW 47 million from Defendant A in cash.

Nevertheless, the lower court rejected the credibility of each of the above statements and acquitted the Defendant on this part of the facts charged.

Such judgment of the court below is erroneous by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2) The lower court’s sentence against Defendant A (a 2 years of imprisonment, additional collection of KRW 183,00,000) against the lower court (a 2 years of imprisonment, additional collection of KRW 183,000) is unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to Defendant A’s assertion of misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles, Defendant A’s summary of the judgment of the court below was also alleged to the same effect as the grounds for appeal under this part of the judgment of the court below.

Therefore, the lower court comprehensively based on the facts admitted by the evidence duly admitted and examined, and all of the acts of transferring each account as indicated in Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, and 10 of the crime sight table are disputed by the defense counsel [Attachment].