All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of the facts, misunderstanding of the legal principles, Defendant used money refunded to the Defendant for the operation of child care centers, such as teaching materials expenses, construction expenses, personnel expenses of infant care teachers, traffic accident charges of drivers of child care centers, and introduction fees to parents who introduced her children, etc., and the Defendant embezzled the money with intent to obtain unlawful acquisition.

Although the court below cannot be seen as having convicted this part of the facts charged, the court below erred by misunderstanding the facts and misunderstanding the legal principles.

2) The sentence of the court below is unfair because the sentencing of the court below is too unreasonable (the grounds for appeal by the defense counsel submitted after the lapse of the period for appeal, the defense counsel's written opinion shall be within the scope of supplement of the grounds for appeal specified in the reasons for appeal, and it shall not be judged separately as to the defendant's assertion that is not entirely indicated in the reasons for appeal). (B) Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding the facts, misunderstanding the legal principles, and violation of the Subsidy Management Act, and the prosecutor who violated the Infant Care Act applied for changes in the indictment on part of the facts charged in the case at the court below, and the court below rejected the prosecutor's application for changes in the indictment and rendered a not guilty verdict.

B) Comprehensively taking account of the evidence submitted by the prosecutor for occupational embezzlement, the court below found the defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, although the defendant could have used some food materials purchase cost of KRW 57,100,000 on his own and embezzled facts. The court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles or misapprehending the legal principles.

2) Improper sentencing of the lower court is deemed unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. The lower court’s determination on the Defendant’s assertion, such as mistake of facts, is based on the following circumstances, i.e., evidence submitted by the Defendant.