The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding the facts of Defendant 1 with regard to the fraud ① A person who borrowed money to the victim G while explaining the operational status of FF farming association (hereinafter “F”) with regard to the fact of fraud, is K that is not the Defendant, and the Defendant would pay the victim G interest in KRW 3 million each month from 2013, if the Defendant extended KRW 100 million to the victim G.

“There is no accusation.”

② In relation to the occupation of occupational embezzlement, the remittance of KRW 50 million to J and K’s account was the person in charge of F’s accounting, not the Defendant, and this was by K’s instruction, who is the actual operator of F.

B. A. The Defendant had a loan claim of KRW 21 million against F, a payment claim of KRW 21 million, a payment claim of KRW 110 million, and a refund claim of KRW 110 million. However, the Defendant did not intend to acquire unlawful profits since it was received as a partial repayment.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (6 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The prosecutor (unfair sentencing)’s sentence of the lower court is too unhued and unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In light of the difference between the original judgment and the appellate court’s method of evaluating credibility in accordance with the spirit of substantial direct deliberation adopted by the Criminal Procedure Act as an element of the trial-oriented principle, the lower court’s determination on the credibility of a witness’s statement was clearly erroneous in light of the contents of the original judgment and the evidence duly examined by the lower court.

Unless there are extenuating circumstances to see the credibility of a statement made by a witness of the original court and the result of an additional examination of evidence not later than the closing of oral argument in the appellate court, the appellate court shall make a judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the original court only on the ground that the judgment of the original court on the credibility of the statement made by the witness is different from the judgment of the appellate court.