The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Provided, That the above punishment shall be imposed for three years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles do not mean that the Defendant was entrusted with the storage of 130 tons each time by the victims, and there was no delivery of 130 tons each time, and all 130 tons each of which was stored in F (hereinafter “F”) and not entered into F (hereinafter “F”), so the Defendant does not constitute embezzlement against the victims.

Even if the defendant was in custody of 130 tons today for victims, the increase of the defendant's arbitrary disposal is not more than 130 tons but not more than 100 tons.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (three years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on misconception of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the crime of embezzlement by offering collateral, the defendant can be acknowledged as having provided the collateral at will during the custody of approximately 130 tons of the defendant's Mayman for the victims, and the defendant's allegation in this part is without merit.

① From May 23, 2016 to June 7, 2016, the victims purchased approximately KRW 37.92 tons from other farmers and paid approximately KRW 170,000,000,000 from other farmers are confirmed by the confirmation document, measurement certificate, and account transaction details prepared by the above farmers. The victims C borrowed KRW 400,000,000 from May 26, 2016 in the process. However, if the victims who are not agricultural products distributors intend to entrust the Defendant with the increase of the volume, there is no reason to purchase a large amount of horse.

(Specially, there is no evidence to regard the victims to have reselled the present situation in another place).