The judgment below

Among them, the guilty part against Defendant A (including the innocent part of the reason) and the concealment of criminal proceeds shall be punished.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A and B (misunderstanding of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles) public conflict (Defendant A and B) (Defendant A and B) held the instant assembly within the scope permitted by the Constitution and law through lawful procedures. On December 6, 2012, text messages sent to J Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “J Co., Ltd.”) are merely a notice of the scheduled assembly. Thus, such an act does not constitute intimidation, which is the means of the crime of public conflict, and there was no intention of public conflict.

Even if the above act constitutes intimidation, as the J’s president did not drink hot water, and agreed on December 2, 2012 to conclude a high-speed sales contract, there is no relationship between the conclusion of a high-speed sales contract and the threat.

B) Defendant (Defendant A) committed occupational embezzlement with respect to the repayment of borrowed money to AI Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “AF”) that the vice president AF Company (hereinafter “AF”) borrowed from AF to pay part of the borrowed money to his AI as KRW 300 million. However, at the time, the Defendant was not a custodian of AF funds, and the above KRW 300 million was borrowed from AF as collateral and borrowed from AF to the Defendant, and the said KRW 300 million was treated as offset against his own performance. As such, Defendant had an intention to obtain unlawful acquisition.

shall not be deemed to exist.

C) The lower court, at the time of the public sale process, deemed KRW 1,800 per share, the tender price assessed by the accounting firm as of December 13, 2012, as of December 13, 2012, to be the market price of the said shares to calculate the amount of damages for this portion.

However, there was no example of normal transactions that properly reflects the objective exchange value at the time, and the calculation of the above stock price is inappropriate in light of the AF’s business prospects, profitability, and the special circumstances of the parties to the transactions.

(d).