The judgment below

The part against the defendant shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

The facts charged in this case against the defendant following the decision are ① criminal proceeds of habitual fraud, such as I, or property derived therefrom (hereinafter “criminal proceeds, etc.”) in collusion with B, B,S, etc., and deposited into the account under the name of BS.

The 4.79 million above (hereinafter “4.7 million above”) and the 2.7.9 million above (hereinafter “2.9 million won”) deposited in the account of Hong Si bank in China, respectively, are in violation of the Act on the Regulation and Punishment of Criminal Proceeds Concealment (hereinafter “Regulation of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds”) that pretended to be disposed of in the above 6.79 million won in total by depositing it in the account under the name of the defendant, and concealed it for the purpose of pretending to be legitimately acquired property. ② The 6.790,000 won bill was withdrawn on June 11, 2012, the 6.799,000 won bill was used arbitrarily at around that time, and the 6.79,000 won bill was used arbitrarily around September 1, 2012 by arbitrarily adding it to the above 4.79,000 won (hereinafter “the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes”) and the Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes (hereinafter “Embezzlement”).

The court below found the defendant not guilty of the above part out of the violation of the Act on the Regulation of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds, the violation of the Act of the Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement), the guilty of fraud, and the violation of the Act on the Regulation of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds, and the violation of the Act on the Regulation of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds, and found the defendant guilty of the above part out of the above 2790,000 bill to be collected additionally in accordance with the Act on Special Cases concerning Forfeiture and Restoration of Corruption Property (hereinafter "Act on the Loss of De

On the other hand, the defendant appealed 4 million won of the guilty part on the ground that there is a mistake or misunderstanding of the facts about the violation of the Act of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) and the misunderstanding of the legal principles, and the sentencing is unfair, and the prosecutor appealed 4 million won of the guilty part on the ground that

The court prior to the remand shall be the defendant and the prosecutor.