The judgment below

The guilty part shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for five years.

The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) Of the guilty portion, Defendant 1 did not have any intention in breach of trust since the contract between the Defendant and the victims was lawfully terminated or the victims voluntarily avoided. As such, the Defendant did not have any other person’s business administrator status in relation to the contract, and the Defendant did not have any awareness that the Defendant violated his/her duties as a supervisor, and did not have any intention in breach of trust.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

B) [2017 Highest 570] Of the frauds against the victim T, the above portion of the money that received KRW 30 million on February 15, 2015 was received as a loan, and is not received as a deposit.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts and legal principles.

2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (seven years of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. Prosecutor 1) [2016 order 75] The Defendant is obligated to give the victim an opportunity to attend the fraternity and withdraw the fraternity until the settlement agreement is completed with the victim G, and if the Defendant does not do so, the intent of breach of trust is recognized.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles.

2) [2017 High Order 570] According to the witness T and Y testimony of the lower court, the Defendant may forge a letter of the borrowed money borrowed in the name of T and recognize the fact that the Defendant exercised the same.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted this part of the facts charged is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles.

2. Determination

A. Determination on the Defendant’s misunderstanding of the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine 1) Of the conviction part, the Defendant voluntarily committed an error in the lower judgment also pertains to this part.