The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The punishment of the accused shall be determined by two years and six months of imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. On March 28, 2017, after the expiration of the submission period of the written reason for appeal, the Defendant, by misapprehending the legal principles, additionally asserts the grounds for appeal by mistake of facts or misapprehension of the legal principles as to the facts constituting the crime No. 5 (the fraud against the victim S) as indicated in the lower judgment, through his defense counsel’s written opinion, etc.

The defense counsel's written opinion cannot be viewed as a legitimate assertion of reasons for appeal because it was submitted after the lapse of the period for filing the appeal. Therefore, it is not separately determined.

1) The KRW 100 million stated in the list of crimes No. 1 of the crime committed in the judgment of the court below is only a part of the amount returned immediately after the establishment registration after the Defendant received the transfer from the victim B in order to pretend that the Defendant would pay KRW 200 million capital of L Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “L”) with the victim B.

The victim B was aware of such fact in advance.

Therefore, the victim B is not a disposal act due to the mistake, but the defendant does not acquire property or property benefits by deceiving the victim B with the intention of defraudation.

2) The sum of KRW 86 million as indicated in (1) No. 17 through 20 per annum of the crime No. 1 of the judgment below as indicated in the judgment below is only the money borrowed from the Defendant’s mother as the Defendant’s personal needs by himself and as the Defendant’s mother.

As to this part, the defendant did not deceive the victim B or have acquired property or property benefits.

3) The crime No. 2 of the crime No. 2 of the judgment below, as indicated in the crime No. 2 of the judgment below, KRW 7 million, as indicated in No. 20,000,000,000 from P, not part of the victim L's right down payment.

Therefore, this money is not a property owned by the victim L, but the defendant used this money individually.

Even if it is not embezzlement, it is not embezzlement.

B. The sentence sentenced by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Criminal facts No. 1 of the judgment of the court below