1. Of the judgment of the court below, the loan of KRW 7.35 billion to U.S. for the guilty portion against Defendant A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A 1) M&D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “R”) with regard to erroneous determination of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (as to the original conviction).

In the case of referring a stock company below, the name “stock company” is omitted for convenience.

2) As to the facts charged, the lower court’s sentence (two years and six years of imprisonment and four years of suspension of execution) against the Defendant is unreasonable, it is so unreasonable that the Defendant did not constitute a crime of breach of trust inasmuch as the Defendant was indicted as an accomplice of T and V, and thus, the Defendant did not constitute a crime of breach of trust. Even if the pledge right on shares held in the future of the AL bank was established on February 2, 2010 in the early Flaman, this does not affect U’s actual ability of repayment. Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court (two years of imprisonment and three years of suspended execution) against Defendant B (unfair punishment) is too unreasonable.

C. A prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles against Defendant A, the prosecutor does not assert that the “P Group (hereinafter “P Group”)” (hereinafter “P Group”) is not a case where the “P Group”) receives investment from a new investor while maintaining its management right and resolving the AO put option (hereinafter “P-Back option”) is not a case where special circumstances are combined, and it is not a reasonable investor who becomes aware of the franchise under the knowledge of such special circumstances.