All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes ("the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes Act") (the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes Act) regarding false appropriation of financial statements by the O (O)

A. As to the prosecutor’s grounds of appeal, the lower court acquitted the Defendants on all the charges of violating the Special Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Misappropriation) on the ground that: (a) Defendant A, B, and C cannot be acknowledged as having conspireded to offset the amount of KRW 4 billion; and (b) the Defendants withdrawn KRW 1.8 billion around 2010 and embezzled it, on the ground that there was no proof of criminal facts, and acquitted all of them.

The judgment below

In light of the records, the judgment of the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, there are no errors in violation of logical and empirical rules and free evaluation of evidence.

B. As to the Defendants’ grounds of appeal, the lower court found the Defendants guilty of violating the Specific Economic Crimes Act (Misappropriation) due to the offset of the amount of KRW 4 billion by the Defendant D’s share of KRW 4 billion, on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, including the following: (a) the developments leading up to the borrowing of KRW 15 billion from the relevant companies, including R Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “R”); (b) the developments leading up to the inclusion of KRW 15 billion in the shareholders’ short-term loans in the O’s financial statements in the shareholders’ short-term loans;

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the evidence duly admitted by the court below, the judgment of the court below is just and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to intentional act in occupational breach of trust, as alleged in Defendant D’s ground of appeal.

Doshed the lower court shall offset the above circumstances.