All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. A. A prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts (1) around July 2012, the Prosecutor’s assertion of fraud did not provide money to the Defendant if G allegedly informed the Defendant of the amount actually spent as the provisional attachment expense and the Defendant’s actual use cost of KRW 5 million, etc. Therefore, G should be deemed to have belonged to the Defendant and delivered KRW 5 million.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the facts charged is erroneous.

(2) The amount of damages recognized when a lawsuit on the merits was filed against the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant company”) to claim occupational breach of trust is anticipated to exceed KRW 49,114,965, which the Defendant received. Thus, the Defendant’s revocation of provisional attachment against the instant company at will constitutes occupational breach of trust as an act causing damages to the occupant organization, and constitutes occupational breach of trust.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the facts charged is erroneous.

(3) On June 17, 2013, the Defendant did not have the intention to repay and the ability to repay to the Defendant at the time of borrowing 2 million won from an apartment occupant’s association at the expense of an attorney-at-law.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the facts charged is erroneous.

(4) On July 1, 2014, the Defendant asserted the act of occupational embezzlement has spent KRW 500,000 from management expenses in order to prepare a record of recording in the course of personal litigation, and thus, it should be deemed that the Defendant had the intent to obtain unlawful acquisition of KRW 500,000,000.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that acquitted the facts charged is erroneous.

B. The Defendant’s assertion of mistake of facts is to repair the defects of the apartment.