All appeals are dismissed.

Of the judgment of the court below, the part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant B is guilty.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the grounds of the prosecutor’s appeal, the lower court, on the grounds stated in its reasoning, acquitted Defendant A on the ground that there was no proof of each crime as to the part of Defendant A’s property in breach of trust due to the acquisition and grant of KRW 3 million on March 8, 2018 among the facts charged in the instant case and the part of Defendant B’s property

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the establishment of the crime of taking property in breach of trust and the crime of

On the other hand, the prosecutor did not state specific grounds for objection against the conviction in the petition of appeal or the statement of reasons for appeal.

2. Review of the record on the grounds of Defendant B’s appeal reveals that Defendant B appealed against the judgment of the first instance, and only asserted the illegality of sentencing on the grounds of appeal.

In such a case, the argument that the evidence adopted by the first instance court as evidence of guilt is inadmissible is not a legitimate ground for appeal.

In addition, even if the number of persons is recognized, the court may voluntarily reduce or exempt the punishment (Article 52(1) of the Criminal Act), and the court below did not reduce the number of persons.

Inasmuch as it cannot be deemed unlawful (see Supreme Court Decision 2004Do2018 delivered on June 11, 2004, etc.), the argument that there was an error of violation of law, such as violation of law, etc. which did not reduce self-denunciation in the lower judgment constitutes an unfair argument in sentencing.

According to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment with or without prison labor for not less than ten years is imposed, an appeal may be filed on the grounds of unfair sentencing. As such, in this case where Defendant B’s minor punishment is imposed, the argument that punishment is unfair because it is too unreasonable cannot be a legitimate appeal.

3. Conclusion.