Nevertheless, since the court below acquitted the charged facts of this case, it erred by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the circumstances revealed by the records of the instant case, including the relationship between the Defendant and the complainant, the background leading up to divorce and division of property, the circumstances leading up to the management of the instant real estate, and the details of the instant judgment on division of property, etc., the lower court, based on the evidence submitted by the Prosecutor, is in the position of a person who keeps the Defendant’s money amounting to 1/2 of the remainder of the profits accruing from the

It is insufficient to conclude that the defendant had an intention to illegally obtain permission from the defendant at the time, and the defendant was acquitted on the charges of this case on the grounds that there is no other evidence to acknowledge

B. In a thorough examination of the reasoning of the judgment below's acquittal and the evidence of this case, the court below's judgment of innocence as to the facts charged of this case based on the above evidence judgment is just and acceptable, and the judgment below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as alleged by the prosecutor, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and the prosecutor's assertion is without merit.

The embezzlement is a crime that punishs a person who keeps another's property to embezzled such property.