The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. In regard to the suspect's interrogation statement stating that "the defendant disposed of capital reduction owned by the victim without the victim's consent," the defendant denies the actual authenticity at the court below, which is inadmissible. Nevertheless, the court below erred by admitting admissibility of evidence (section 1). The defendant's statement that corresponds to the facts charged in this case is not reliable, and the court below erred by violating the logical rules on fact-finding, and the defendant disposed of capital reduction owned by the victim with the victim's consent, and thus, the crime of embezzlement is not established (section 2).

The sentence of unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment for a term of six-month suspension, community service, 120 hours) of the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. Except in cases where there is an obvious clerical error in the protocol as to Chapter 1, the document recorded in the protocol of trial as the litigation on the trial date is proved only by the protocol, and its probative value is absolute. Thus, in cases where the Defendant’s opinion on whether consent or authenticity has been made with respect to the evidence submitted by the public prosecutor is recorded in the evidence list, the document on the evidence list bears absolute probative value unless it is a part of the protocol of the trial (see Supreme Court Decision 98Do2890, Dec. 22, 1998). Upon examining the record, the following circumstances revealed: ① The public prosecutor applied for evidence to the police and the protocol on examination of suspect with the statement to the effect of confession of the Defendant at the first trial date, and the court below, which is part of the protocol of the trial on that date, which is part of the protocol of the court below, recognizes the actual authenticity, etc. in the “written opinion on evidence” column of each relevant protocol of the public prosecutor examination.