All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A violated the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant”) invested three lots of forest land, including G, H, and I (hereinafter referred to as the “instant land”) in order to establish a liquefied petroleum gas charging station, and Defendant B agreed to conduct the business externally.

Since F Co., Ltd. and Defendant B are in the relationship of anonymous associations under the Commercial Act, transferring the instant land to Defendant B does not constitute title trust.

In addition, Defendant A transferred all the internal and external ownership of the instant land to Defendant B to obtain permission for liquefied petroleum gas filling business, so it cannot be deemed that Defendant A held the title trust of the instant land to Defendant B.

B. The point of embezzlement (defendant C) Defendant C received KRW 10 million from the victim M through N in order to seek a person who is entitled to obtain permission for a liquefied petroleum gas charging business (hereinafter “original resident”), and Defendant C used money as a cost to seek original residents, and thus does not constitute embezzlement.

2. Determination

A. A. (1) Violation of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name is a contract under which two or more persons agree to jointly operate a business by investing in one another, and the association agreement under the Civil Act is limited to the agreement which runs a specific business jointly, and the extent that it does not meet the requirements for establishment of the association (see Supreme Court Decision 2010Da51369, Oct. 28, 2010). Meanwhile, an anonymous association becomes effective when one of the parties agrees to contribute to the other party’s business and distribute profits arising from the other party’s business (see Article 78 of the Commercial Act).