All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the grounds of appeal by Defendant A, the lower court convicted Defendant A of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (excluding the part of acquittal in the grounds of appeal) among the facts charged against Defendant A.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations as stated in the grounds of appeal and erred in its judgment by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the officers and employees of financial companies, etc. violating the Act on the Specific Economic Crimes, duties relationship, and quid pro quo, etc., and contrary to the principle of balance and equality of punishment systems, there were no errors by interpreting and

Defendant

A The Supreme Court precedents cited in the grounds of appeal are different from this case, and thus are inappropriate to be invoked in this case.

2. As to the Defendant B’s grounds of appeal, the lower court found Defendant B guilty of the part concerning Defendant B’s occupational embezzlement due to Defendant B’s violation of the Specific Economic Crimes Act (excluding the part concerning innocence) and the use of KRW 16,565,842, among the facts charged.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles on the establishment of occupational embezzlement, the relevance to duties and the quid pro quo, expectation, and degree of proof of the violation of the Specific Economic Crimes Act.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.