The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. With respect to each violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) against Special Vehicles DY270 and DY320, the lower court acquitted the Defendant on the grounds that the amount of profit of the Defendant caused by the embezzlement of the said Special Vehicles falls short of KRW 500 million (guilty in the grounds), and found the Defendant guilty of embezzlement under each Criminal Act, which is included in the charges, and found the Defendant not guilty on the part of embezzlement against DY150

As the defendant appeals against the conviction only, the part of embezzlement against DCY150 of the special vehicle is found not guilty, while the part of acquittal [the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) based on the amount of profit] in each violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) against DCY270 of the special vehicle is found not guilty, and the part of acquittal (the part of each violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement based on the amount of profit) shall be deemed to have been exceeded against the public defense of the parties unless the prosecutor's appeal against it has been filed (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2004Do5014, Oct. 28, 2004) is in accordance with the theory of innocence of the judgment of the court below, and ultimately, the scope of the judgment of the party's appeal shall be limited to the part of the judgment of the court below (the summary of the judgment below's acquittal shall not be decided again).

A. DaY270 out of the special vehicles of this case (limited to DY270 and DY320; hereinafter referred to as “special vehicles of this case”) do not constitute another’s property which is the object of embezzlement. Since the Defendant and the victim are scheduled to dispose of the special vehicles of this case, the Defendant’s disposal does not constitute embezzlement.

B. One and half years of imprisonment with prison labor of the lower court.