[Defendant B]

1. A. The non-guilty part of the judgment of the court below and the violation of the Narcotics Control Act among the guilty parts.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (unfair sentencing)’s punishment (a year of imprisonment, confiscation of additional collection of KRW 340,00) is too unreasonable.

B. As to the crime of embezzlement in the judgment of misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding of the legal principles, the vehicles in the judgment are not leased by the defendant from the damaged person, but the defendant was placed in the victim and is owned by the defendant.

In addition, the Defendant did not pay the installment for three months or more, and there was justifiable reason to refuse the return of the vehicle until the Defendant received the installment payment, etc. at the time of the sale and purchase of the vehicle and the installment payment, etc. at the time of June 2014.

Therefore, embezzlement is not established.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (6 months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, Etc. in its holding, and 8 months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of embezzlement and fraud) is too unreasonable.

(c)

The prosecutor (Defendant B), among the facts charged against Defendant B, shall be found guilty on the part of the facts charged against Defendant B based on relevant evidence. However, the court below acquitted the Defendant on this part of the facts charged. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Judgment on Defendant A’s assertion

A. It is recognized that the Defendant has shown an attitude against the Defendant when making a confession of all of the instant crimes, that there is a family member to support the Defendant, and that the amount of damage caused by the embezzlement of possession and the fraud of credit cards is not relatively significant.

B. However, the Defendant held a penphone again during the period of repeated crime due to a violation of the Act on the Control of Narcotics, etc., and committed a crime of medication over several times, and the Defendant appeared as a witness in the court of the court below to make a false testimony to cover Defendant B, an accomplice, at the court of the court below. Perjury interferes with the fair judicial action of the court, thereby hindering the judiciary of the Republic of Korea.