The guilty part of the judgment of the court below of first instance (including the innocent part) and the judgment of the court of second instance shall be reversed.

I. Scope of the judgment of the first instance court

1. The judgment of the court below and the judgment of the court below on whether to appeal the defendant's charges is against the ASpecial Economic Crimes Act (Misappropriation), the violation of the A Special Economic Crimes Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) is "violation of the A Special Economic Crimes (Embezzlement)," and the violation of the ASpecial Economic Crimes Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Misappropriation) is "Violation of the ASpecial Economic

Defendant A’s appeal of Defendant AY AY AY AY AY AY AY AY AZ Z Capital Markets Act Violation of AY AY AY AY AY AY AY AY AY AY AY AY C. Faw Fast (Embezzlement): Not guilty of appeal by the prosecutor’s appeal of embezzlement in the name of advance payment and embezzlement part of the purchase price of automobiles against the LAG: No prosecutor filed an appeal of embezzlement related to processing benefits for DC, CI, and DD exceeding KRW 100,000 among the loans on September 27, 2012, excluded this part from the scope of appeal in the petition of appeal.

㉲ 유죄 : ㉰, ㉱ 제외한 나머지 부분 피고인 A의 항소 AZ 특경가법위반(횡령) ㉳ 유죄 항소 없음(피고인 AZ 항소 취하) 특경가법위반(배임) ㉴ 유죄

2. 당원의 심판범위 우선 피고인 AZ에 대한 ㉳, ㉴의 유죄 부분은 위 피고인이 항소를 제기하였다가 항소를 취하하였으므로, 이미 분리ㆍ확정되었다

(See Supreme Court en banc Decision 91Do1402 delivered on January 12, 1992). The part of innocence against Defendant A, which is related to the crime of a single comprehensive crime, was judged in the trial of the first instance, along with the part of innocence against Defendant A, and the part of conviction against Defendant A, which is related to the crime of a single comprehensive crime. However, the prosecutor did not file an appeal, and the part of acquittal against Defendant AY and the part of conviction against Y were judged to be exempted from the object of attack and defense. The part of acquittal against Defendant AY and the part of conviction against Y were judged to be judged to be in the trial of the first instance, along with the part of innocence caused by a single comprehensive crime, but they were judged to have been exempted from the object of attack and defense.