A. As to Defendant 1’s fraud around October 2013, 2013, Defendant 1 received money from the injured party as a partner’s money, and the Defendant did not borrow money from the injured party by deceiving the injured party. Although the intent to repay and the ability to repay had been made at the time of receiving the money, Defendant 1 was unable to repay due to the aggravation of financial circumstances, such as bankruptcy of the transaction party, etc., so there was no intention of deception.

B) As to the fraud around May 2014, the victim unilaterally supplied golf products to the defendant and there was no fact that the defendant received golf products by deceiving the victim, and even though the defendant had the intent to repay and the ability to repay at the time of receiving the golf products, there was no intention of deception since the financial situation of the transaction partner, such as bankruptcy, etc., aggravated, did not make payment of the goods.

C) As to embezzlement, the victim did not know the exact quantity due to the Defendant’s failure to verify the quantity at the time of taking over the goods, and the Defendant and the victim did not agree on the timing, method, etc. of settlement of sales proceeds of the goods, and the victim remitted KRW 4.17 million twice to request payment of sales proceeds.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. As to embezzlement of 192 sale proceeds of golf ethylulty 192, the victim supplied the Defendant with 1,177 golf ethyl finished products.

In the investigation process, it was confirmed that the police visited the defendant's warehouse and stored 854 golf ethylis, and the defendant returned 131 golf ethylis to the victim's instructions.

Since the defendant asserts that he was entrusted with sale by the injured party, the defendant is 192 persons (i.e. 1,177 - 854 -131).