All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles (guilty part) do not constitute embezzlement of the above money by using the money listed in the crime sight table (1) through (3) and (5) as stated in the judgment of the court below in order to perform duties related to victimized child-care centers.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which convicted the defendant is erroneous in the misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

2) The punishment sentenced by the lower court (an amount of five million won) is too unreasonable.

B. In full view of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, prosecutor 1) and the evidence submitted by the prosecutor, it is recognized that the defendant embezzled the money listed in the attached Table (4) of the crime committed in the judgment of the court below.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant of this part of the facts charged is erroneous as it erred.

2) The above sentence committed by the lower court against the Defendant is too uneased and unfair.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant asserted that the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the Defendant’s mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine was identical to the grounds for appeal in this part, and the lower court rejected the above assertion in detail, following the summary column of evidence in the judgment.

Examining the above judgment of the court below in comparison with the records of this case, the judgment of the court below is just.

In addition, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles and mistake of facts, as alleged by the defendant, in addition to the fact that the amount used by the defendant was not submitted to the court below for the purpose of performing the duties related to the victimized childcare center until the trial of the court below.

subsection (b) of this section.

Therefore, this part of the defendant's argument is without merit.

B. Determination of the Prosecutor’s assertion of mistake of facts 1) The summary of this part of the facts charged is that the Defendant is the president of the Victim D Child Care Center (hereinafter “victim D”) and that of the victimized Child Care Center.