A. Defendant 1) As the victim F of misunderstanding of facts and the Defendant decided to run a high-end car trade business, the victim is 2,575 square meters away in Gwangju City owned by the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant Gwangju land”).

(2) The Defendant borrowed money from H as collateral and decided to invest in the above business, and the Defendant used the said borrowed money in consultation with K, which is an employee of the victim, so the crime of embezzlement is not established. (2) The sentence imposed by the lower court of unreasonable sentencing (one month of imprisonment) on the Defendant is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) In the event that the victim’s statement that he would not give the documents on the termination of the right to collateral security in his name is consistent and reliable, the court below rejected the victim’s assertion and found the victim not guilty of this part of the facts charged. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts.

B) In the criminal trial related to each fraud against the victim C, a commercial building in the apartment complex of overcheon City (hereinafter “R commercial building”) is located in the Defendant.

) AE (hereinafter “instant AE”)

Although it has been recognized that the defendant was not authorized to sell or dispose of the money independently, and there is sufficient credibility of the victim's statement by deceiving the defendant as if he had such authority, the court below rejected it and accepted the defendant's assertion and acquitted the defendant of this part of the charges. The judgment of the court below is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts. 2) The above sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant is too uneasible and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant is also the same as the grounds for appeal in this part of the judgment below regarding the Defendant’s assertion of mistake.