Of the acquittal portion of the lower judgment, it is the primary charge concerning the new building of M&A.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles is Defendant O Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim company”).

It is true that the bonus amounting to one billion won is paid on the basis of piece rates. However, it is true that the determination of piece rates is based on the business judgment or discretion of the company, and it is reasonable when considering the defendant's contribution to the company or the business performance of the victim company. The victim company and its family members are so-called "family company" composed of shareholders, and the victim company and its family members are substantially determined through a family meeting or the board of directors without a formal general meeting of shareholders. Since the payment of piece rates in this case was actually permitted by the family meeting, it cannot be evaluated as embezzlement by receiving piece rates in this case from the victim company. Furthermore, the defendant's acceptance of piece rates in this case cannot be evaluated as embezzlement. In addition, the defendant's payment of piece rates in this case was made in compliance with both the methods and procedures of payment and normal accounting procedures of payment by the victim company, and even if the defendant who is the largest shareholder of the victim company is not piece rates, it cannot be justified to recognize the defendant's intent of illegal embezzlement or acquisition of dividends.

B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles regarding guarantee-related occupational breach of trust for L Co., Ltd., without giving any benefit to the victim company, allowing the defendant to stand a joint and several surety for the loan obligations of L Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “L”) amounting to KRW 4.3 billion in that the defendant bears an obligation equivalent to the above amount, which in itself increases the risk of damages to the victim company. Moreover, L is a company whose father and the defendant are all shares.