The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

, however, the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The lower court convicted Defendant A of this part of the facts charged, although Defendant A did not have any violation of the duties against the victim’s association by disregarding the procedures for lending the funds to the victim association and ordering the victim association to execute the loans on a voluntary basis, by deceiving Defendant A and the victim G forestry association (hereinafter “victim G forestry association”) as if Defendant B could cancel the senior security right of the real estate that Defendant B provided as security, and the loan was implemented after obtaining approval from the loan examination committee consisting of the president of the victim association and the Z, etc. of the victim association. In so doing, the lower court found Defendant A guilty of this part of the facts charged. In so doing, the lower court erred by

B. The lower court’s sentence (10 months of imprisonment and 2 years of suspended sentence) that the Prosecutor’s Defendant A alleged unfair sentencing (hereinafter “public prosecutor’s Defendant A”) is too uneased and unreasonable.

(c)

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented by the prosecutor's argument that Defendant B was guilty of the facts, the act of deceiving Defendant A and the victim association as if Defendant B could perform the conditions of lending, such as cancellation of senior security right, etc., was implemented even when Defendant A violated the guidelines for the lending business of the victim association. Thus, this part of the facts charged against the Defendant could be fully recognized, but the court below rendered a verdict of innocence on the ground that the relationship between Defendant B's deception and the granting of loans to the victim association is not recognized. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. Defendant A’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine, and the defense counsel at the lower court asserted the same purport as the grounds for appeal in this part of the lower judgment, and the lower court alleged and relevant to the Defendant’s assertion under the title “decision on whether to constitute a crime of breach of trust by Defendant A”