Of the convictions and innocences of the judgment of the court below, the victim'sO shall be excluded from the occupational embezzlement.

The summary of the grounds for appeal and misapprehension of the legal doctrine (guilty part of the judgment of the court below) (A) the Defendant, operating the R Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “R”), developed an study program on its own by concluding an agreement with a school or fishing school in India and Hungary, etc., and sold it to the victims as one product and received the payment for it, and did not receive a specific amount by distinguishing the specific items of the payment and specifying the corresponding amount. Thus, the amount that the victims paid to R is not entrusted with the purpose and purpose of use.

R concluded a contract with the victims on the program of studying abroad and concluded that it is impossible to return the amount paid after obtaining an admission permit from schools, etc., and all victims received an admission permit. Since R does not have an obligation to return the amount to the victims, it cannot be deemed that it still belongs to the ownership of each victim.

During the payment received by R from the victims, it includes the amount that R can obtain with its own profits without paying to the school in accordance with the agreement with the school, and R also receives the sales proceeds of study program study by credit card.

Therefore, the defendant is not in the position of a person who keeps expenses for study programs that the victims delivered to R in the course of business.

(B) The money that the victim W, AH and the victim Z delivered to R includes the expenses for the prior training of the Indian Institute of Arts and the expenses for the tuition of the BH University and actually had been trained in the Indian Institute of Arts, so the amount of the Defendant’s embezzlement recognized by the lower court should be excluded from the expenses for the prior training.

(C) Nevertheless, the lower court out of the facts charged in the instant case, the part of KRW 10,145,00 among the following facts: (a) occupational embezzlement against the victim V, W, X, AL, Y, Z, AE, AF, AG, AH, AH, AJ, AK, AP, and AM; and (b) occupational embezzlement against the victim AD.