The part of the judgment of the court of first instance and that of the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed, respectively.

Nos. 1, 3, 7, and 7 of the judgment of the defendant.

1. Of the instant facts charged, the lower court dismissed the public prosecution against the violation of the Labor Standards Act and the violation of the Guarantee of Workers’ Retirement Benefits Act. As such, the part of the lower judgment’s dismissal of the said public prosecution among the lower judgment was separately determined as is, and excluded from the scope of the judgment of the lower court.

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. The Defendant’s assertion (1) is guilty of committing fraud against the above victims or violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud), although the Defendant did not deceiving the victim H, BA, F, AF, AG, or AH, the lower court convicted him/her of the charges.

(2) Since each machinery concealed by the misunderstanding of the legal principles is null and void since the seizure of each of the above machinery by the Defendant as the obligor is not owned by the Defendant, it cannot be the object of the crime of concealment of Official Seal, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles and found the Defendant guilty of each of the crimes of concealment of

(3) Each sentence sentenced to the first and second instances of sentencing (two years of imprisonment with prison labor in the first instance court and two years and six months of imprisonment with prison labor in the second instance, three years and four years of imprisonment with prison labor in the second instance) is unreasonable compared to the extent of the Defendant’s responsibility.

B. The second instance court acquitted the victim of embezzlement and breach of trust against the victim’s two capitals, by misunderstanding the facts or misapprehending the legal principles.

3. The judgment of the court below in the first and second instances was rendered against the defendant, and the defendant filed an appeal against each of the judgment of the court of first and second instances. The court decided to hold the above two cases jointly for the trial.

Of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant, the crimes of Articles 1, 3 and 1, 5-A, 2, 5, and 6 as indicated in the judgment of the court of first instance, and the crimes of Articles 2, 3, 4, 5-C, 6, 7, and 8 as indicated in the judgment of the court of second instance among the judgment of the court of first instance are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act and Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act.