The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. misunderstanding of facts (1) 50,000 won that the defendant received from the Victim K is merely a mere borrowed money from the victim, not a criminal intent to defraud the defendant.

(2) The Defendant merely requested the Defendant to sell the instant bottled by the Victim Q with the Defendant, and did not offer money to U or V as security, and there was no fact that Q Q used the Defendant’s portraitation of the Defendant’s misappropriation from the Victim Q. Therefore, the Defendant cannot be held liable for the crime of embezzlement.

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing (one year and two months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) According to the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below on the assertion of mistake of facts, the defendant deceivings the victim K to purchase the works of the victims of the shipbuilding era desired by the above victim as stated in the judgment of the court below, and acquired them by receiving KRW 50,00 as the advance payment for the work, and then it can be sufficiently recognized that only two other pictures that are less than or not known to the above victim's value is less than or less than the author, so the above argument by the defendant is without merit.

(2) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court on the part of the victim Q Q, the Defendant was found to have received the instant bottle and portraitization from the victim Q Q as stated in the lower judgment, and had been returned to the victim Q, even though it was not easy to sell bottles, it should have been in custody and embezzled by providing the same as security by borrowing money from U.S., and without making efforts to recover it, and the Defendant neglected to make efforts to recover it, and it can be sufficiently recognized that all the facts of embezzlement were embezzled by asserting that the instant portrait was not received at all, and that there was no return to the victim Q. Therefore, the Defendant’s assertion is without merit.

B. The argument on unfair sentencing is made.