The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant is innocent. The summary of this judgment shall be notified publicly.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (based on factual errors or misapprehension of legal principles) in the limited company C (hereinafter “instant company”) in which the Defendant served as the Defendant was implementing the taxi commission scheme rather than the full-scale management system, and in the taxi commission scheme, the transport earnings exceeding the taxi commission belongs to a taxi engineer, and thus, the excess taxi earnings are not in the position of a taxi engineer to a person who takes the custody of another’s property.

Therefore, the Defendant did not pay transport earnings exceeding the taxi commission to the instant company while operating a taxi.

Even if the crime of occupational embezzlement is not established, it is not established.

2. Before the judgment on the grounds for appeal by the Defendant’s ex officio based on the changes in indictment, the Prosecutor applied for changes in indictment with the contents of “a summary of the modified facts charged” as stated in the previous facts charged below. Since the subject of the judgment is changed by this court’s permission, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

However, despite the above reasons for ex officio reversal, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and misapprehension of legal principles is still subject to the judgment of this court.

3. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The Defendant, from March 1, 2006, served as a taxi engineer in the instant company located in Gyeyang-gu Incheon Metropolitan City from March 1, 2006 to the present date.

The Defendant decided to pay the full amount of taxi transport income per day to the company in accordance with the employment contract with the above company.

Nevertheless, the Defendant: (a) operated a taxi for business use owned by the instant company on October 1, 2012; (b) paid KRW 145,700,000 to the instant company while in the course of performing its duties for the instant company; and (c) embezzled it as shown in the list of crimes in attached Table from around that time to October 31, 2013, because it did not pay the remainder of KRW 5,600, while performing its duties for the instant company.