The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

The defendant is not guilty, and the summary of the judgment of innocence is publicly notified.

1. Of the facts charged against the Defendant, the lower court rendered a judgment of innocence regarding the occupational embezzlement of each amount listed in the separate sheet of crimes Nos. 2 and 3 as indicated in the judgment of the lower court, and convicted the Defendant as to the remainder of the facts charged.

Accordingly, only the defendant appealed on the grounds of mistake of facts as follows. Of the judgment below, the part of innocence which the defendant and the prosecutor did not appeal was separated and finalized as it is.

Therefore, the scope of this court's judgment is limited to the conviction part of the judgment below.

2. The summary of the grounds for appeal (the factual error) is irrelevant to the purchase price of gift paid by C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Appellant”) to donate to the representative of the above council of occupants’ representatives with the purchase price of gift in the E building’s own list of the council of occupants’ representatives. The sum of Nos. 2 through 5 of the above crime list was paid for the expenses of the above council of occupants’ representatives. The sum of the above crime list Nos. 6 through 8 of the above crime list was paid for the expenses of the above council of occupants’ representatives, and the sum of 246,500 won was paid for the expenses of the above council of occupants’ representatives’ representatives, and the sum of the above crime list Nos. 6 through 8 of the above crime list was unrelated to the company that is the complainants’ own expenses, and even though the defendant did not use the criminal facts as personal, the judgment of the court below convict

3. Determination

A. The summary of this part of the facts charged is an employee of the victim C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) of the building management company located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd.”) in Gangnam-gu, who worked as the head of the management office of the building, the main complex building located in Mapo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D (hereinafter “instant building”).

On December 24, 2015, the Defendant received 82,500 won from the victim company under the pretext of the purchase price for the exchange season, and on December 24, 2015.