The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In regard to embezzlement 1, misunderstanding of facts, (Article 1) of the Act, although the Defendant used the 60 million won of the 60 million won, which the Defendant received from G for the repayment of the Defendant’s obligation, the Defendant did not have any intention to obtain unlawful acquisition. As such, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of this part of the charges, which was erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts, as to the fraud (Article 2-a-b and Paragraph (b) of the Act) with the victim, (Article 2-a-b) as to the fraud, (Article 2-a-b) the Defendant did not receive money from the victim during a long-term ginseng supply transaction with the victim, and did not intend to obtain money from the time of the ginseng transaction or the loan.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that found this part of the facts charged guilty is erroneous in misconception of facts.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. 1) As to the assertion of mistake of facts, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence and evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below, namely, the victim F stated in the court below that “the defendant has not consented to the use of KRW 40 million recovered from G for his personal purpose,” and there is no circumstance to deem that the victim had impliedly approved it, and the defendant made a statement to the effect that he is aware of this part of the crime in the interrogation of the prosecution (Evidence No. 380 of the evidence record, there is no circumstance to deem that the victim has made a false confession, and it is supported by the victim’s investigative agency and the court below’s statement at the court below, and the credibility of the above confession can be sufficiently recognized. In full view of these circumstances, the defendant used the defendant’s debt repayment amounting to KRW 40 million as stated in this part of the facts charged.