The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding) and K consistently stated in the investigative agency and the lower court that there was no settlement agreement between the Defendant and C with regard to the Defendant’s use of the instant KRW 3.6 million. The Defendant is recognized to have embezzled the said KRW 3.36 million with the intent of unlawful acquisition, as it is difficult to regard the transfer of the unpaid investment amount of KRW 42 million to be paid by C at the time of remitting the said KRW 3.6 million to G bank under the name of the Defendant.

Nevertheless, the court below determined that it is not sufficient to recognize that the defendant arbitrarily transferred the KRW 3.60,000 to embezzlement, which affected the conclusion of the judgment by misunderstanding the facts.

2. Determination

A. The lower court, based on the evidence duly adopted and examined at the lower court, deposited the following facts and circumstances, i.e., ① the Defendant and C invested 42 million won each from April 2015 to operate a military payment business, such as Ansan Gyeong, and the Defendant deposited KRW 42 million each with its partner’s money into the Ebank account in the name of C (D) managing its partner’s money. In light of the fact that C deposited the total amount of KRW 40,640,000 among its partners on April 9, 2015 to August 31, 2015, ② the Defendant deposited KRW 30,000 in the said account under the name of 300,000,000 in the name of 30,000 won in the account under the name of 305,000 won in the name of 30,000 won in the said account; and ② the Defendant did not deposit part of the amount in the account under the name of 136,364,05,00,00,00.