Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against Defendant A and Defendant B, and the part against Defendant A in the judgment of the court of second instance.

Defendant A’s summary of the grounds for appeal: The punishment of the lower court (the first instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for a year and six months, additional collection of KRW 365 million, and the second instance judgment: imprisonment with prison labor for a period of six months, additional collection of KRW 150,4370,00) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

The court below erred in the misapprehension of the facts or legal principles as to the additional collection amount B, and held that the amount actually acquired by the defendant out of the amount of KRW 75 million received in breach of trust was a cause of 35 million, and on the premise of the collection, the defendant collected a total of KRW 63,340,000 from the defendant, but the defendant transferred a total of KRW 7 million out of the above KRW 35,000,000 to AY and A, as such, the court below should exclude the sum of KRW 14,00,000,000,000,000,000 won, out of the above KRW 35,000,000,000,000 to the defendant at the time of the sales of the money.

misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles with respect to other additional collection claimed by the defendant through the statement of reasons for appeal was rejected on the first trial date of the first trial.

The punishment sentenced by the first instance court to the defendant (the imprisonment of 10 months, the suspended sentence of 2 years, the additional collection of 6,340,00 won) is too unreasonable.

Defendant

AZ: The punishment sentenced by the second instance court on the defendant (the imprisonment of 8 months, the suspension of the execution of 2 years, the additional collection of 26.5 million won) is too unreasonable.

The prosecutor: The punishment that the court below sentenced against the Defendants (each of the above punishment against Defendants A, B, and A, and with respect to Defendants AY, one year of suspended execution, two years of additional collection, and 48.5 million won) is too unafford and unfair.

Judgment

Defendant

Comprehensively taking account of the relevant evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court and the trial court as to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts as to the additional collection amount B, the Defendant, as stated in the first instance judgment, received KRW 72 million from S on September 23, 2014, and withdrawn KRW 14 million around September 29, 2014, and then withdrawn KRW 7 million from AY bank account under the direction of A at that time.