The judgment below

Among them, the part of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by imprisonment.

1. The progress of the lawsuit of this case and the scope of the judgment of this court

A. The lower court convicted the Defendant of all the facts charged.

Accordingly, the Defendant filed an appeal against the whole judgment of the lower court on the grounds of mistake of facts, misunderstanding of legal principles and illegality in sentencing.

Before remanding, the first instance court partially accepted the defendant's grounds for appeal, found the defendant not guilty on each part of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes and the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (proving evidence, etc.), reversed the judgment of the court below and determined a new punishment

A prosecutor filed an appeal on the acquittal portion of the judgment of the court prior to remand on the grounds of misunderstanding of facts and misunderstanding of legal principles.

The Supreme Court has erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, which affected the judgment.

Based on its judgment, it was reversed and remanded to this court, and the appeal was dismissed for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (such as evidence re-appeal) on the ground that the grounds of appeal are not indicated.

B. Of the acquittal portion of the judgment of the court prior to the remanding of the scope of the trial by this court, the part of the judgment of the court on the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (i.e., evidence re-issuance) shall be separated by the prosecutor's appeal, and the conviction portion of the judgment prior to the remand shall be separated by the defendant and the prosecutor as they are not appealed. Thus, each of the above parts was excluded from the scope of the trial (see Supreme Court Decisions 91Do1402 delivered on January 21, 1992, Supreme Court Decisions 91Do1402 delivered on November 25, 201, Supreme Court Decision 2010Do10985 delivered on November 25, 2010, etc.). Accordingly, the judgment of the court after remand is limited to the portion of the judgment of the court

2. Summary of reasons for appeal;

A. The Defendant, who misleads the victims of breach of trust, has entered into the instant contract.