All appeals filed by the defendant and prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) In the course of occupational embezzlement due to withdrawal or use of the name of the expense (Article 1 of the criminal facts in the original judgment), the Defendant comprehensively led to an investigation agency’s investigation for about 1 year and 6 months on a total of 14 occasions, and, due to his own mind, the Defendant comprehensively led to a confession on all the items on which the detailed name is not indicated in Q’s funds log among the details of the criminal complaints filed by Q.

However, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty as to this part of the judgment below is omitted when referring to the annexed list of crimes (1) through (4) in the annexed Form of the judgment of the court below.

Since each of the money includes a majority of the money that is not clearly embezzled by the defendant as shown below, it is difficult to view that there is credibility in the confession of the defendant related to this part.

Therefore, this part of the charge cannot be deemed to have been proven without any reasonable doubt.

On March 8, 2010, A. B. B. 1, B. 1, B. 3, 200 A. B. 4, B. B. 1,200 A. 3,00 AZ B. B. 94 on December 30, 2010, and B. 1, B. 3,00 A. 1, B. 4, B. 1, 200 A. 4, B. 1, 200 B. 94 on February 20, 2013, B. 1, 107 B. 429, B. 1,00 A. 4, B. 1, 200 A. 1, B. 1, 200 A. 3, B. 1, 2010 A. 8, B. 1, 200 A. 40, Q. 2, 14, 2014