Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part on Defendant B and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed, respectively.

Defendant

B Imprisonment for two years.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, Defendant B’s crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) (hereinafter “instant embezzlement crime”).

There is no participation. Even if the embezzlement of this case was involved, the embezzlement of KRW 207,350,000 from October 1, 2009 to April 11, 201, took part in the defense counsel’s opinion on December 11, 2017 only for embezzlement of KRW 433,729,334, total sum from October 1, 2009 to October 5, 201, or embezzlement of KRW 433,729,334.

(2) The sentence of the first instance court (one and half years of imprisonment with prison labor, three years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B’s punishment (two years of imprisonment, three years of suspended execution) and the sentence of the second instance court (one year of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) are too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court as to the Defendant A’s grounds for appeal, the fact that Defendant A conspired with Defendant B to commit the instant embezzlement can be sufficiently recognized.

Therefore, Defendant A’s misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles is without merit.

① Defendant B, the father of the board of directors of the school juristic person E, and Defendant B, at J high school and F high school established by Defendant B from around 1995 (hereinafter “instant school”).

Administrative staff, teachers, assistant principals, and school teachers have been given certification, issuance of school affairs, general affairs of school affairs, general affairs of administrative offices, establishment of schools, general affairs of corporations, and school teachers.

(2) During the period of the instant embezzlement crime (from March 3, 2008 to October 5, 2010), Defendant B was the president of the instant school, and Defendant A was the principal of the instant school.

The head of the administrative office, who is the person in charge of the administrative office of the instant school, shall be W (Defendant B-1 South) from March 3, 2008 to September 30, 2009, and from October 1, 2009 to April 12, 2010.