Of the judgment of the court below of first instance, the part against Defendant A and the judgment of second court shall be reversed.

Defendant

A. Imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The sentence of imprisonment (one year of imprisonment) pronounced by the first instance court against Defendant A is too unhued and unfair.

B. Defendant A 1) misunderstanding of facts (the point of embezzlement in the judgment of the court of first instance) is irrelevant to the embezzlement of the lower court of this case. Defendant A is irrelevant to the embezzlement of the lower court of this case. 2) The respective sentence of the lower court of unfair sentencing (the first instance court: imprisonment of 1 year and 2 months: imprisonment of 6 months) is too unreasonable.

C. Defendant B’s misunderstanding of facts as to Defendant B’s 1’s shot beamline was believed by Defendant A to make the beam beamline as one’s own possession and was removed and sold according to his direction, and there was no perception of the other’s nature of property. Defendant B’s shot beamline’s punishment (two years of suspended execution in six months of imprisonment) sentenced by the first instance court on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination:

A. Prior to the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the public prosecutor ex officio and the defendant A, the first and second court rendered ex officio the judgment following the separate examination with respect to the defendant A, and then sentenced the defendant A to the above punishment. The defendant A filed an appeal against each of the above judgment, and the court of the first and second court decided to hold concurrent hearings with respect to the above appeal cases. Each of the crimes of the court below against the defendant A shall be sentenced to a single sentence within the scope of the term of punishment subject to aggravated concurrent crimes pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act in relation to concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act. Thus, since the part against the defendant A among the judgment of the court of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance cannot be exempt from reversal.

(However, Defendant A's assertion of misunderstanding of facts is still subject to the judgment of this Court, and this is examined separately below).

According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the trial court as to the defendants' assertion of mistake of facts, the F of the victim E management corporation is the civil engineering work and the structural construction work from the D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "D").