The judgment below

The part of the crime No. 2-A of the judgment is reversed.

There are 7,13 and 14 crimes table in the judgment of the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) As to the mistake of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (as to the guilty part), the Defendant received investments from the victim D to the point that the Defendant was faced with the financial crisis, and thus, did not deceiving the victim as stated in the facts charged, and the Defendant, who is a mere introduction who is not the representative director, has a duty to specifically notify the victim of the financial situation of the company.

This is because H, the representative director, embezzled the company's funds.

Therefore, there was no intention to commit deception and fraud against the defendant.

B) On December 29, 2009, the Defendant left KRW 195 million from the account of the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) operated by the Defendant on December 29, 2009, with respect to the occupational embezzlement (i.e., the number of crimes Nos. 1, 4, 5, 6, 9, 11, and 12). He voluntarily withdraws the said money from the account of the E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “E”) and paid it to the Defendant, who is demanded to return it from the Defendant for personal use.

The Defendant borrowed money from P, S, and T (hereinafter “P, etc.”) while operating G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”). Since E succeeded to the existing obligation of G, it cannot be deemed embezzlement even if E paid interest-free money to P, etc. with the funds of E.

【Criminal Crime Table 7 managed by the Defendant

Although Q received KRW 20 million from the Defendant’s account, G did not return the seizure collection from the dispatching tax office to the pertinent E due to the delinquent taxes, it does not constitute embezzlement or refusal to return it.

x) H voluntarily withdraws from his own account and uses the list Nos. 8.