All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The Defendant first executed apartment construction costs with the Defendant’s money, etc., and subsequently received a refund of the expenses first executed from the victim’s council of occupants’ representatives to the Defendant’s account, and there was no embezzlement of apartment management expenses.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case, which erred by misapprehending the facts and adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence (one year of imprisonment, one year of suspended execution, and 40 hours of community service) imposed by the prosecutor by the court below on the defendant is too unhued and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below regarding the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts: (a) when cash withdrawal was made from the apartment management fee account of the victim's council of occupants' representatives through cash withdrawal, the same amount or some amount was deposited into the account under the defendant's name through the same cash withdrawal method within one to two minutes; (b) the above amount was used for private purposes, such as the defendant's telephone fee, gas fee, electricity fee, insurance premium, and milk payment; (c) the defendant first spent the defendant's expenses for apartment management, such as apartment construction cost, with the defendant's money; and (d) later, the victim's council of occupants' representatives failed to submit a receipt or financial data on the payment of expenses; (e) the defendant filed a complaint against the apartment's resident, R, F, which was kept in the victim's office from October 201 to October 2013, 2013; (e) the victim's council of occupants' representatives accepted receipts from 13.4.