1. The guilty part of the judgment of the court below against Defendant B (including the acquittal part in the reason) and Defendant A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. We examine the contents of Defendant B’s statement of grounds of appeal, etc. submitted after the deadline for submission of the grounds of appeal, or the assertion on the date of trial to the extent of supplement.

Therefore, Defendant B’s defense counsel’s assertion on the facts constituting an offense in violation of the Labor Standards Act is not determined among the judgment of the court below stated in the supplementary appellate brief submitted on July 30, 2013, which was after the deadline for submitting the appellate brief.

1) Regarding the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) 1, this part of the attached Table 1 as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement)

O. Only hereinafter referred to as “N.”

(2) The lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that: (a) the Defendant embezzled the N’s funds by entering into a processing sales contract under the premise that the shares of AA are de facto value; (b) as the price received in KRW 2,50,000 per share; and (c) the Defendant was paid for KRW 1,000 per share; (c) however, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the Defendant embezzled the N’s funds by entering into the processing sales contract. Even if the purchase price of the AA shares was excessively calculated, this constitutes a crime of breach of trust, regardless of whether it constitutes a crime of breach of trust; and (d) the Defendant cannot be held liable for embezzlement. As to the Nos.

(3) The judgment of the court below that held that the defendant embezzled the above KRW 300 million, despite the fact that the defendant was not individually used the above KRW 300 million in accordance with the joint agreement, and paid the down payment amount of KRW 300 million in CT in accordance with the agreement. The judgment of the court below that determined that the defendant embezzled the above KRW 300 million. (3) As to the Nos. 3 of the annexed crime list (1) as to the [Attachment 10 million], the check of KRW 10 million paid to DL is the defendant on Nov.