All the judgment of the court below (including the acquittal part of the first judgment of the court below) shall be reversed.

Defendant is indicated in the first judgment of the lower court.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence of the original judgment of the defendant (unfair sentencing against the original judgment) of the first instance court (a 8 months of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime of No. 1, and a fine of 5 million won for the crime of No. 2 in its decision) and the second original judgment (a fine of 8 months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor (misunderstanding of facts with regard to the first judgment of the lower court and unreasonable sentencing) 1) Of the amount entered in the details of loans attached to the attached Form 4 of the judgment of the lower court, the total amount of KRW 85,966,700 (hereinafter “instant KRW 85,966,700”) shall be the same as

() Since the Defendant’s personal loan money, not the Defendant’s personal loan money that the Defendant received and kept in the account in the name of the victim, is the same as that of other money, the instant amount of KRW 85,966,700 constitutes the amount embezzled by the Defendant. The Defendant, on December 16, 2014, ordered M to directly withdraw the money owned by the victim by obtaining the passbook, cash card, and password from the victim’s name to pay his personal loan money. As such, the Defendant, on December 16, 2014, ordered M to directly withdraw the money owned by the victim. Accordingly, M to directly withdraw the money from the victim’s D account after December 16, 2014 (hereinafter “instant KRW 29,887,151”).

(2) The lower court determined that the Defendant did not embezzled the part of the amount of KRW 85,966,70 in the victim’s account and the amount of KRW 29,887,151 in the instant case, which was transferred from the victim’s account, did not constitute embezzlement. The lower court erred by misunderstanding of facts. 2) The lower court’s judgment on the first instance of unfair sentencing is too unjustifiable and unreasonable.

2. Ex officio determination

A. The judgment of the court below was sentenced to the defendant for the decision of consolidation of the trial court, and the defendant and the prosecutor filed each appeal against the judgment of the court of first instance, and this court decided to hold a joint hearing with each appeal cases. The crimes of the judgment of first instance and the judgment of the court of second instance are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act.