The judgment below

Among them, the guilty part against Defendant A (including the innocent part for reasons) and the part against Defendant B and C shall be respectively.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, ① Defendant A received each amount from Defendant A as shown in the attached Table 2 attached hereto as stated in the judgment below by Defendant C is used as business activity expenses for J Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “J”) and M Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “M”), and thus the act of receiving each of the above amounts does not constitute a crime of misappropriation in breach of trust. However, the lower court convicted Defendant A of this part of the charges. In so doing, it erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of misappropriation in breach of trust or by misapprehending the legal principles on the crime of misappropriation in breach of trust.

② Defendant C’s remittance of each of the three types of money (total of KRW 65 million) in the crime sight table 3 in the judgment below that Defendant C transferred to the AM’s deposit account, which is the Defendant’s child, is the following circumstances: (a) Defendant C lent funds necessary for Defendant C to register M as a cooperation company at Defendant C’s request, and the interest thereon was transferred to Defendant C to the AM’s deposit account pursuant to the agreement to be borne by Defendant C; (b) this part of the facts charged is not the crime of breach of trust; and (c) the lower court convicted Defendant C of this. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the crime of receiving property in breach of trust or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the crime of receiving property in breach of trust.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court to Defendant A (the imprisonment of three years, additional collection of KRW 675,218,754) is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant B and C’s punishment (Defendant B: imprisonment of 2 years and additional collection of 403,44,629 won, Defendant C’s imprisonment of 10 months) declared by the lower court is too unreasonable.

(c)

(1) The prosecutor’s misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal principles) of the charge of the receipt of the charge of breach of trust against the Defendants. ① The sum of the payments that Defendant A received from Defendant C on November 28, 2008 and December 29, 2008, KRW 40 million is to be continuously traded with J.