The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

However, the period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant: (a) The lower court, without taking into account the following facts, found Defendant: (a) guilty of the part of the instant facts charged, i.e., giving and receiving KRW 3 million in cash as of June 3, 201; and (b) cash worth KRW 10 million as of February 23, 2012; but was erroneous.

A) In light of the fact that “the details of pre-deposit and withdrawal” prepared by AE are merely a voluntary entry of AE and that the statement of AE made by the Defendant to provide cash is not consistent and contradictory to each other, its credibility cannot be recognized.

B) Even if the Defendant received KRW 3 million from AE and KRW 10 million.

Even if it is highly probable that it would have been paid at the attorney's expense, and in this case, it cannot be viewed as a violation of defense law even if it can be charged for embezzlement of the law office.

2) The sentence of the lower court (one hundred months of imprisonment and additional collection) that is unfair in sentencing is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor: (a) On July 29, 201, the lower court acquitted the Defendant of this part of the facts charged, without considering the following points, on the charge of giving and receiving KRW 2 million in cash (not guilty part of the reasoning of the lower judgment) from July 29, 201.

A) With respect to each statement protocol and suspect interrogation protocol against AE, it is unreasonable to deny the admissibility of evidence of each protocol as a whole without specifying the pertinent part, solely on the ground that AE made a statement to partially deny the authenticity established in the original court.

B) The contents of each statement or interrogation protocol with respect to AE, and “related cases” refer to the case in which the Seoul Central District Court 2014 high Gohap 830,873 (Joint) is high.

In the lower court’s judgment, “related cases” is called “related cases.”

In full view of the statements made in the court, “the details of deposit and withdrawal” prepared by AE, and the account transaction details in the bank account under the name of AE, the Defendant can fully recognize that the Defendant received KRW 2 million in cash from AE on July 29, 201.