[Defendant A] Of the judgment of the court below, the crime No. 1 of the court below

(a) Part concerning one crime;

1. Grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (De facto mistake, misunderstanding of legal principles, and unreasonable sentencing) 1-2 of the lower judgment

A. (1) misunderstanding of facts as to a crime (Embezzlement 51 million out of land expropriation compensation) and misunderstanding of legal principles, the Defendant is an organization that is autonomously organized by the Victim Village Association (D residents in Chang Man-gu, Changwon-si).

(2) As the Defendant used part of the land expropriation compensation, it does not constitute embezzlement, even if the Defendant used part of the land expropriation compensation. (2) The facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment

A. 2) In regard to the crime [Embezzlement 7,376m2 (hereinafter “the instant forest”) held by the Victim’s Village Association, misunderstanding of facts as to the embezzlement, misunderstanding of legal principles, the extraordinary general meeting of July 16, 2016 at the Victim’s Village Council (hereinafter “instant general meeting”).

A) As the sale of the instant forest was resolved with the consent of a majority of the members present and with the consent of a majority of the members present, the Defendant’s disposal of the instant forest does not constitute embezzlement, nor did the intent of unlawful acquisition or embezzlement (it was caused by mistake that there exists a valid resolution). Therefore, the intention of unlawful acquisition or embezzlement should be dismissed in accordance with Article 13 of the Criminal Act.

3) The facts constituting the crime of the lower judgment

The mistake of facts concerning crimes (fixing private documents and the uttering of falsified Investigation Documents), the minutes of the victim community conference and the list of members attached thereto shall not be considered as a document connected to one another.

The preparing body of the minutes is the defendant, who is the chairperson of the victim community meeting at that time, and the member list is the preparing body, and the member list is a document separate from the minutes, and in the case of private documents, only the forgery of types can be punished. Therefore, in the case of minutes, the defendant cannot be deemed to have forged.

4) The lower court’s sentence against the Defendant of unreasonable sentencing (two months of imprisonment and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

(b).