The guilty portion of the lower judgment against the Defendants (including the acquittal portion for each reason) and the Defendant B of the lower judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In light of the following circumstances as to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) due to the provision of real stocks issued by K K K K Co., Ltd. by mistake of facts and misapprehension of legal principles, Defendant A’s name was changed to “M” through Defendant B (hereinafter “M”). In the case of other corporations, the indication of “stock company” is omitted. Thus, the actual stocks issued cannot be the object of embezzlement (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Do2822, Feb. 18, 2005). Here, “stock” refers to the stock certificates, which are securities representing the stock rights. Since such expression is ordinarily used, it cannot be seen that the actual stocks were in the status of a person who keeps the expression “stock” as it is, as it is, in the instant facts charged.

① Defendant B kept the real shares of M was a CD around November 24, 2006, and at the time, the transferee under the contract for acquisition of M management rights from U was a CD.

Therefore, L, which finally takes over the status of transferee from CD on the 30th day of the same month, is irrelevant to the storage of the actual shares of Defendant B.

② Defendant A was merely a person who introduced L to advise L on a loan and did not take over the status of M transferee.

③ Defendant B was in custody of the MM in a neutral position with both the transferor and transferee of the issued shares, and was not in the position of Defendant A’s order regarding the disposition.

(2) The lower court rendered a not-guilty verdict on the facts charged that Defendant B, a custodian of the actual shares issued, has embezzled part of the shares, but failed to exhaust all necessary deliberations.