Defendant

All appeals filed by A and C and prosecutor against the Defendants are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (hereinafter in this paragraph “Defendant”) 1) misunderstanding of facts [related to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Crime of Violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Crime of Breach of Trust) in the original judgment] , the Defendant did not have any intention in breach of trust, and the Defendant’s act did not actually cause property damage to Company I (hereinafter “instant company”). Nevertheless, the lower court rejected the Defendant’s assertion on the grounds of the circumstances indicated in its holding, and rendered a judgment of guilty of this part of the charges against the Defendant. In so doing, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment. 2) In light of the various sentencing conditions in the case of unfair sentencing sentencing, the sentence (two

B. Defendant C (hereinafter in this paragraph referred to as “Defendant” and the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Misappropriation) in the judgment of the court below) provided a passbook deposited in L in the amount of KRW 500 million in order to mislead misunderstanding that the obligation would not be extinguished if the obligation is not repaid even if there is an assignment order, and to implement L with the agreement. The Defendant did not have the intention of breach of trust, and there was no damage to the company of this case due to Defendant’s act, and there was no pecuniary profit

(2) The Defendant’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense of the grounds for appeal to the extent of supplement in case of supplement of the grounds for appeal) from January 7, 2015, to use KRW 500 million from L for two months as the capital necessary for examining the capital of the supervising authority’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’s defense counsel’