All appeals are dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the grounds of appeal by the prosecutor, the court below affirmed the judgment of the court of first instance which acquitted Defendant B of the violation of the Special Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) by recognizing that there is no proof of crime among the charges against Defendant B and the charges against Defendant A of violation of the A Specific Economic Crimes Act (Misappropriation).

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on joint principal offenders, deception, breach of trust, and intent in breach of trust,

The Prosecutor appealed to the entire judgment of the court below, but there is no statement in the petition of appeal or the appellate brief concerning the guilty portion against the Defendants.

2. As to the grounds of appeal by Defendant B, the lower court upheld the first instance judgment convicting Defendant B of violating the Specific Economic Crimes Act (Embezzlement) among the facts charged against Defendant B.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not exhaust all necessary deliberations, and did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine on intent to obtain unlawful acquisition, the establishment and amount of profit of a crime of violating the Specific Economic Crimes Act (Embezzlement), the burden of proof, the exclusion of illegally collected evidence, and the admissibility of evidence, or by violating the principle of court-oriented principle and direct

In addition, according to Article 383 subparagraph 4 of the Criminal Procedure Act, only in cases where death penalty, life imprisonment, or imprisonment or imprisonment without prison labor for not less than ten years has been imposed, an appeal on Defendant B is allowed on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing.