The judgment below

The judgment of the court below of conviction and 5 million won occupational embezzlement in the name of S shall be made on March 6, 2012.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal 1) The Prosecutor’s (1) is examined in the following cases, on the ground that there was a modification of the indictment for occupational embezzlement of KRW 20,000,00, under the pretext of vessel usage fees by mistake and misunderstanding of legal principles, and there was a modification of indictment for the victim G, as seen earlier

① Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to inspect the embezzlement of KRW 5 million under the name of S, the fact that the Defendant arbitrarily used and embezzled KRW 5 million transferred on May 22, 2012 to the Victim G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) under the pretext that the Defendant, a supervisor of the construction work in the ordering place, should provide money to the “S”.

However, the lower court rendered a judgment of not guilty of this part of the facts charged.

② Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to examine the fact of embezzlement of KRW 10 million as safety management expenses, the fact that the Defendant arbitrarily used and embezzled the amount of KRW 10 million transferred on March 21, 2012 to the victim G, under the pretext of safety management expenses to be paid to the vice president of Q (hereinafter referred to as “ Q”) company Q (hereinafter referred to as “ Q”) which is the original office, for the victim.

However, the lower court rendered a judgment of not guilty of this part of the facts charged.

③ Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor to investigate the embezzlement of KRW 12 million in the name of the pump purchase, the fact that the Defendant, who received KRW 10 million from the victim corporation, was arbitrarily used while performing his/her duties and embezzled on October 29, 2014 for the victim.

However, the lower court rendered a judgment of not guilty of this part of the facts charged.

④ Comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented by the prosecutor to the charge of fraud No. 1458, the Defendant received KRW 232,090,000 from July 20, 201 to August 13, 2014, by deceiving the victim without full payment ability or intention even if the Defendant borrowed money from the victim H.