The judgment of the court below is reversed.

[Defendant A] The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

except that from the date of this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (A) 1 misunderstanding of legal principles) The Victim C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd”) filed the instant complaint in violation of the subordinate agreement entered into with the Defendant A who was the representative director.

Nevertheless, the prosecutor instituted the prosecution of this case.

This constitutes abuse of the power of prosecution because it arbitrarily exercises the power of prosecution beyond the scope of discretion of prosecution.

The judgment of the court below which neglected this is unfair as it erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

(B) Of the facts charged in violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (hereinafter "the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes Act"), it cannot be deemed that the construction cost incurred in the E-house is KRW 1125,300,000,000,000 for the construction cost incurred in the E-house, only with respect to the construction-related materials prepared by G, cannot be said to have been proven. Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the remainder of the facts charged (hereinafter "Chapter 2").

(C) Among the facts charged against the violation of the Specific Economic Crimes Act (Misappropriation), there seems to have been some arguments on the part of the defense counsel to the effect that this Court issues the revised facts charged. This argument is originally reversed ex officio, and this Court rendered a new judgment, but it determined en bloc in the column of judgment on the grounds for appeal, taking into account the convenience of toxicity and common nature of the issues. (C) As to the part of the facts charged against the violation of the Specific Economic Crimes Act (Misappropriation), more than 105 persons did not supply to E housing.

Most of the supplied products are supplied as free of charge or sample.

It is time irrelevant to E project (2014).

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which erred by misapprehending the legal principles.

(hereinafter referred to as the “Third Chapter”). The facts charged of embezzlement for the purpose of business on a monthly basis are as follows.