The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence against the accused shall be determined by a fine of KRW 1,00,000.

The above fine shall be imposed on the defendant.

1. According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, the court below found the defendant guilty on the ground that the defendant could have voluntarily consumed KRW 9.8 million without the victim B's consent. However, the court below found the facts erroneous and found the defendant not guilty.

2. Determination

A. Before determining on the grounds for appeal by the prosecutor of the amendment of indictment, the prosecutor examined the case ex officio, and the prosecutor applied for the amendment of indictment with the content that the facts charged in the instant case are modified as stated in the following facts charged, and this court permitted it, and thus the subject of the trial was different, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

However, the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding the facts against the judgment of the court below is still subject to the judgment of this court within the scope of the modified facts charged, despite the above reasons for ex officio destruction.

B. (1) On June 16:17, 2007, the Defendant of the facts charged of the instant case was delegated to invest securities from the victim B in the account in the account of the national bank in the name of the Defendant in the name of the victim and was transferred to the account of the national bank in the name of the Defendant for securities investment on the part of the victim, and embezzled the sum of KRW 9.8 million from around that time to November 26, 2007 by arbitrarily withdrawing 9.8 million from that time to November 26, 2007.

Dodice Defendant’s argument was used with prior consent from B, and it was not used arbitrarily.

The court below held that the defendant used the above money for personal purposes in the second police interrogation protocol of the defendant's second police interrogation protocol which corresponds to the facts charged of this case, although the court below stated that "the 9.8 million won out of the amount received from B was withdrawn in cash and used for personal purposes." However, the defendant obtained the consent of the court below as to the use of the money for personal purposes.