1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added in the trial are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. Basic facts

A. Co-Defendant A of the first instance trial served as the Plaintiff’s business employee from April 30, 2013 to August 2015, and the Defendant is punished by the said sentence.

B. A, around January 2014, embezzled KRW 37,861,081, which was received from D located in Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, as well as KRW 156,028,305,00,000, not by deposit in the Plaintiff’s account but by voluntary consumption, and in the same manner, embezzled KRW 156,028,30.

On December 25, 2014, A prepared and delivered to the Plaintiff a letter of intent to recognize the fact of embezzlement and the amount thereof, and to pay the said money in installments in a manner that deducts the amount of KRW 1500,000 per month from his/her own pay.

A performed 12,00,000 won (=1,500,000 won x 8 months) while working for eight months thereafter.

C. A does not pay the above money after the withdrawal of the Plaintiff around August 2015.

On the other hand, even after the completion of the foregoing person’s entry, the Plaintiff embezzled KRW 9,047,980 from the H’s side located in Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, for four times from April 3, 2014 to July 7, 2015, as if the Plaintiff had not supplied the goods to the F located in Sinung-gu, but has supplied the goods, and embezzled food materials worth KRW 16,215,60 in total as if the goods were supplied.

In the first instance court of this case, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 169,209,485 [the original recognized amount = KRW 156,028,305 - the amount equivalent to the additional embezzled goods amounting to KRW 12,133,200 [the amount equivalent to KRW 16,215,60 according to the statement in the evidence No. 4, or KRW 16,13,200 [the Plaintiff’s KRW 16,13,200] and damages for delay.] of the additional embezzled goods amounting to KRW 16,215,60 [the Plaintiff’s KRW 9,047,980] and damages for delay.

The above A recognized all of the plaintiff's claims on the first day for pleading of the first instance court, and on February 3, 2016, the first instance court declared that all of the plaintiff's claims against A were cited.