The judgment below

The guilty part (including the acquittal part of the reason) shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

(2).

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 피고인 (1) 사실오인(유죄부분) ㈎ 특정경제범죄가중처벌등에관한법률위반(횡령)의 점에 관하여, ① 내비게이션의 소유권과 관련하여, 피고인은 이 사건 내비게이션을 M으로부터 4억 5,000만 원에 매수하였는데 그 중 2억 5,000만 원은 피고인의 M에 대한 기존 채권과 상계하고 나머지 2억 원을 M에게 지급하였으므로 피고인이 소유권을 취득한 것이며, 피고인이 피해자 (주)F을 위하여 보관한 것이 아니다.

② With respect to the amount embezzled by the Defendant, the number of houses used in the instant case, which were stored in G warehouse from the original state H, is limited to 3,000 units, and the inventory status prepared by E on September 30, 2010, stated the amount of the stock used in the instant case as 3,381, but there is no objective basis and there is no credibility in the entry without distinguishing the unit price and quantity by model. Accordingly, there is no proof as to the amount embezzled by the Defendant.

③ Even if the Defendant was not the owner of the instant construction work, considering the fact that the Defendant had claims against M and F at the time of disposing of the instant construction work, and was in the custody of the instant construction work for the purpose of securing claims, and that the value of the instant construction work would decline without promptly disposing of the construction work, the Defendant merely disposed of the construction work in the instant case, and cannot be said to have the intent of embezzlement.

㈏ J에 대한 대부업등의등록및금융이용자보호에관한법률위반의 점에 관하여, 금전의 대부계약 당사자는 (주)F과 (주)U이고 피고인이 대부업을 한 것이 아니다.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court (three years of imprisonment, four years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

나. 검사 (1) 사실오인(무죄부분) ㈎ 업무상 횡령의 점에 관하여, 검사가...