The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

In the case of a misunderstanding of the substance of the grounds for appeal or a misunderstanding of the legal principles, the Defendant continued to engage in financial transactions, such as investment cases in several times except for the investment cases listed in the list of crimes in the victim E, and the settlement of accounts has been completed.

In this regard, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the charges that the defendant acquired money by deceiving the victim E, and found the defendant guilty of the charge of this part of the charge that the defendant acquired money by deceiving the victim E, and there is an error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment due to misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles.

In the case of embezzlement, documents issued by E to implement the procedure for cancelling the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security under the name of E concerning Kimhae-si J land (hereinafter “instant land”) issued by the Defendant are documents to implement the procedure for cancelling the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security under his/her name on June 2, 2011. The registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security under the name of E to be cancelled in this case is a person on September 8, 201.

In addition, the crime of embezzlement is not established on the ground that the procedure for cancellation of the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security was not fulfilled due to the dispute between E and E even though E was delivered properly, since the registration of the establishment of the right to collateral security under the name of E was not cancelled with the consent of the victim H.

In this regard, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the charges of embezzlement with the intent of embezzlement while the defendant received and kept 50 million won of the amount of debt repayment to E from the victim H and used it in mind. The court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

Sentencing is unfair.