The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case, although the amount of embezzlement stated in the facts charged in this case of mistake of facts was used as business expenses and used for personal purposes. The court below erred in the misapprehension of facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the defendant (eight months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged in this case on the following grounds: (a) the lower court’s determination on the assertion of mistake of facts: (b) based on the evidence duly admitted and adopted by the lower court: (c) the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence, namely, ① the investment agreement explicitly stipulated in F in advance for the use of the investment funds received from F for the purchase of products; (b) the Defendant claimed that the said investment funds were disbursed as expenses for the management of the company; (c) the Defendant’s payment was not required by the office in view of the size of the office and the equipment; and (d) the Defendant’s payment was decided to suspend the payment of the funds in a reasonable manner; and (c) the Defendant did not submit specific explanation or supporting materials for other uses; (d) the Defendant did not disclose the details of the execution; and (d) there was a document prepared and issued by the Defendant for the use of the funds deposited in the victim company as stated in the facts charged in this case.

(2) The prosecutor must prove that there is an act of embezzlement as an act of realizing the intention of unlawful acquisition of judgment at the trial of the party, and there is no room for a judge to give a reasonable doubt.