The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

The defendant's appeal against the judgment of the court below of the second instance.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Part 1 of the judgment of the court below in light of the following: (a) misunderstanding of the facts and legal principles, the Defendant informed the victim I of the uncertainty that the number of persons F (hereinafter “F”) is uncertain; (b) the Defendant provided explanation and consent on the pertinent loan name each time it receives money from I in the list of annexed crimes; and (c) used it as the actual name; and (d) the Defendant provided a deceptive act in receiving the said money; or (c) there was a criminal intent to obtain the said money by fraud.

shall not be deemed to exist.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. The part of the judgment of the court below (misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal principles) of this case, the victim H Co., Ltd. of this case (hereinafter “victim Co., Ltd”) is Defendant 1 who owns the entire shares directly or in the name of the borrower, and the funds of the passbook, card, and its account in the name of the victim Co., Ltd. have been managed and used by the defendant alone.

In particular, the money that the Defendant transferred to the account or withdrawn in cash as stated in the facts charged in the instant case is owned by the victim company as the balance of KRW 60,016,070 that the Defendant borrowed from the first original adjudication resolution;

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant guilty on the ground that the defendant's corporate head of Tong, card, and deposited money owned by the defendant was owned by the victim company.

2. The argument of each appeal case against each judgment of the court below was consolidated in the trial following the combination of pleadings, but the court below sentenced imprisonment with prison labor and the second instance court sentenced each fine. If each of the judgments of the court below is different from the imprisonment with prison labor and the fine, even if the arguments of the court below are combined in the appellate court, the appellate court can maintain each of the sentence sentenced by the court below, and it does not necessarily require a sentence of the same kind. Thus, the consolidated trial itself is limited.