The judgment below

Part concerning Defendant A and B shall be reversed.

Defendant

A Imprisonment with prison labor for two years and for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A 1) Defendant A was appointed as the president at a general meeting of the Victim E-friendly Council held on November 30, 2014 (hereinafter “victim E-friendly Council”).

Defendant

Although the judicial effect of a resolution of appointment A as the chairperson of the victim-friendly council is not recognized, since there is a considerable reason to believe that Defendant A was appointed as the chairperson of the victim-friendly council, Defendant A was guilty of all the above crimes. Thus, the crime of documents or electronic records made after November 30, 2014 among the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below is not recognized, and the judgment of the court below which found Defendant A guilty of all the above crimes.

B) In addition, among the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, the preparation and the exercise of the notice of convening the T name under paragraph (3) is nothing more than the preparation and use of the above document at will by U.S. employees of the certified judicial scrivener office. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below convicting Defendant A of this part of the charges in this part of the charges is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts. C) Defendant A used all the sales proceeds of the AK AK forest land of 11,306 square meters and AL forest land of 14,281 square meters (hereinafter “the instant forest”) for the victim’s relatives, and thus, Defendant A cannot be deemed to have any unlawful acquisition intent necessary for establishing the crime of embezzlement.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below which found Defendant A guilty all of the embezzlement is erroneous in misunderstanding of facts.

2) The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (two years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable and unfair. (b) Although Defendant B, by mistake of facts, consumeds the successful bid price of land, such as 5,210 square meters, which Defendant B kept in custody for the victim’s family council, Defendant B used considerable money for the victim’s family council, Defendant B used it for the victim’s family council, and Defendant B paid for the victim’s family council in the past, it is also reasonable.