The judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the Daegu District Court Panel Division.

The grounds for appeal shall be examined ex officio prior to judgment.

1. Of the facts charged in the instant case, the summary of the fraud is as follows: “The Defendant, as the president of the Evolving Association (hereinafter “former Association”), entered into an advertising contract with D University T Community Autonomy Council (hereinafter “Autonomous Association”) around December 2012, but around that time, entered into an advertising contract with KRW 4 million. However, as if the Defendant entered into an advertising contract with its members, it would be false as if he/she entered into an advertising contract with KRW 8 million and received KRW 3,507,000 from the Permanent Association on March 11, 2013, and received KRW 3,507,000 from its members.”

For the reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, by deceiving members of the prosperity Association as if the Defendant entered into an advertising contract with the Autonomous Association in KRW 4 million, and by deceiving them of the members of the prosperity Association to acquire money equivalent to the difference from the prosperity Association.

Report, this part of the facts charged was convicted.

2. However, the judgment below convicting this part of the facts charged is not acceptable for the following reasons.

A. Fraud is established when another person acquires the property in his possession through his/her disposal, and thus a deception was made to acquire the property of another person in his/her possession.

Even if a crime of fraud is not established and only established in the crime of embezzlement (see Supreme Court Decision 87Do2168, Dec. 22, 1987, etc.).B. The following facts are revealed according to the reasoning of the lower judgment and evidence.

1) On December 2012, 2012, the Defendant, as the chairperson of the early top-down conference, consulted to publish the advertisement of the stores of the members of the Association on the “V” to the “V” person who is the director of the meeting of the Self-Governing Council and the book of the above Self-Governing Council.

The defendant did not represent the prosperity and entered into an advertising contract with the autonomous council in his/her individual qualification;

Even if it is individually, it is not a business related to the advertisement of stores of members of the association, but a member of the association has performed his duties as the chairperson of the association.

2) On December 12, 2012, the Defendant attended a meeting on December 13, 201 and the members of the British Association present.