The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of the facts or misapprehension of the legal principles) stated in the statement of reasons for appeal on the grounds of appeal that the sentencing was unfair, but it is apparent that it is a clerical error in light of the circumstances, etc. for which the court below rendered a verdict of

D The Defendant, a representative of D, received an amount equivalent to the income tax on penalty from the Foundation E (hereinafter “Foundation”) without obtaining D’s consent, and the penalty that the Foundation received by the Foundation is not subject to the source collection, but the Defendant was aware of such fact, and the amount equivalent to the income tax collected by the Defendant was used for the management fund of H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “H”) operated by himself at his own discretion, thereby making D as a person liable for tax withholding from the form of source, and at the time of its use, there was no agreement between the Defendant and D on offsetting the amount equivalent to the income tax on D’s claim against the Defendant and the Defendant at the time of its use. In light of the above, it is recognized that the Defendant, by deceiving the Foundation, obtained a total of 44,169,876 won.

Nevertheless, since the court below acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case, it erred by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The following three-thirds of the facts charged while maintaining the existing facts charged (hereinafter “basic facts charged”) by the prosecutor of the indictment to change the indictment at the trial of the party.

B. 1) Change of the facts charged as described in paragraph (1) requires selective addition (hereinafter “the first selective facts charged”), and the name of the crime is “occupational embezzlement”; the applicable legal provision is “Articles 356 and 355(1) of the Criminal Act”; the facts charged are set forth in paragraph (3) below.

C. 1) As described in the paragraph, an application for amendments to a bill of amendment was filed with the effect that the modification is alternatively added (hereinafter “second selective charges”), and this Court.