1. The judgment below is reversed.

2. The defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than three years and six months; and

3. 841,850,000 won from the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In the statement of grounds for appeal, the mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles alleged that there was no intentional intent since the Defendant did not know that the check was criminal proceeds since the beginning of the exchange of the check in cash. However, even according to the above argument, the check was known that the check was the proceeds of L, and the Defendant, even though he was unaware of the fact that the check was L's proceeds of crime at the time of receipt of the above check, the Defendant, even though he was unaware of the fact that the check was L's proceeds of crime at least after T et al. received the above check, thought that the company operated by T et al. would be able to raise illegal funds, avoid tax evasion, avoid sales, conceal any crime of various tax, or unlawfully deducted the amount of money. However, considering that the issue at the time was known, the Defendant stated that he would be 20 million won, and that he could sufficiently receive the above facts that he was able to find out the credibility of this part of the record of the court below (Evidence 654).

With regard to the embezzlement, D’s delivery of 1.92 million won to the Defendant via S and T constitutes illegal consideration because it constitutes an illegal consideration because it is in accordance with the purpose of washing money from criminal proceeds. Therefore, even if the Defendant used the illegal consideration without returning it, it does not constitute embezzlement.

Even if embezzlement is constituted, 40 million won out of the above money is allowed to be used by the defendant for commission or introduction costs from T to foreign exchange such as U.S. exchange.