The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant

A shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for a year and four months, and by imprisonment with prison labor for a year.

(b).

1. Summary of the grounds of appeal by Defendant A: (1) misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles; (1) Occupational Embezzlement against the victim F Co., Ltd. (joint crime with Defendant B) (1) cannot be deemed as property the outstanding claim against the J (hereinafter “J”) of F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), and Defendant A is not the custodian of the money deposited in his own account, but the owner.

② In lieu of Defendant A’s delayed payment of wages, Defendant B transferred F’s outstanding amount receivable to J to Defendant A.

Therefore, Defendant A’s act of using the outstanding amount upon repayment cannot be deemed as embezzlement.

(3) Even if Defendant A was in the custody of the above money,

Even if Defendant A paid for the operation of F or G, it must be excluded from the amount of embezzlement.

(2) Fraud against the Korea Electric Power Corporation of the Victim (joint crime with Defendant B) (1) The Korea Electric Power Corporation of the Victim did not receive the benefits agreed upon in the initial contract and did not cause any loss, and thereby, Defendant A did not gain any profit. Therefore, the crime of fraud is not established.

② Even if the crime of fraud is established, the pecuniary profit recognized by the lower court did not take into account the difference between the prices of electric wires and sewage pipes.

(3) The Defendant A’s occupational embezzlement against the Victim G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) uses G’s corporate card with the consent of theO in charge of the relevant work in order to obtain repayment of the existing claim against Defendant A’s Victim G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”), and thus, there is no intention of embezzlement.

② Even if embezzlement is recognized, the part of KRW 800,00,00, which is permitted to be used monthly for welfare expenses for Defendant A should be excluded from the amount of embezzlement.

(4) Damage to the credit of the victim G: (a) at the time G moved and installed the electric cable pipe manufacturing machine in the factory; and (b) Defendant A.