The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for one year, and for six months, for each of the defendants B.

, however, the defendant.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) misunderstanding of facts (A) , Defendant A, at the time of requesting the repair company to leave the repair company, did not transfer the benz vehicle to Defendant B, but did not transfer the benz vehicle as a security for the obligation against Defendant B.

Nevertheless, the court below found Defendant A guilty of the facts charged regarding embezzlement on the premise that Defendant A transferred B’s benz vehicle as a collateral for the obligation to Defendant B, and there is an error of law by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of judgment

(B) At the beginning, Defendant A, by acquiring I who is the birthee, purchased a vehicle in the name of I and sought a loan as a security, but I refused to do so. Defendant B expressed his intent not to purchase a vehicle in the name of I, and there was no fact that Defendant B, K, etc. forged various documents under the name of I to be used.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the charge of forging private documents and uttering of falsified Private Document, and thus, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The sentence of imprisonment with prison labor imposed by the lower court on Defendant A is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B (1) MW3, which had been transferred by Defendant A, had been transferred to Defendant A again, and there was no vehicle to be on board, and thus, Defendant B used the benz vehicle in his custody. Therefore, there was no awareness that the benz vehicle is stolen.

Nevertheless, since the court below found the charge of acquiring stolens guilty, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) The imprisonment with prison labor for six months sentenced by the court below on Defendant B is too unreasonable.

2. Determination of ex officio on Defendant A’s grounds for appeal.