The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The defendant who received USD 10,000 from the victim of the Reasons for Appeal is recognized as having embezzled the remainder of USD 9,000 ($ 10,174,000) by arbitrarily using 1,000 ($ 10,174,000), even though he paid 1,00 among them as consolation money.

Nevertheless, the lower court erred by misapprehending the facts charged, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case runs the marriage broker business of “D” in both weeks from around October 2009 to around October 5, 201, and on March 5, 2011, the Defendant concluded a branch contract with the victim E and arranged the marriage of “F” and “W” women who are space bekbestan.

As above, the Defendant, while mediating an international marriage, knew that the F would pay USD 10,00 as compensation for mental physical damage inflicted on the new father G in the event of cancelling the marriage due to the change of the F’s mind, and promoted a marriage with F on the condition that he would pay USD 10,000. However, as the marriage with G was cancelled due to the change of the F’s mind, the Defendant received KRW 11,274,00 for consolation money received from F on November 11, 201 from the victim and kept the same.

On November 28, 2011, the Defendant paid 1,000 dollars (Korean Won 1,100,000 won) out of the consolation money to G in a restaurant located in Space Bestan, Scenan on November 28, 201, and embezzled by arbitrarily using the remaining KRW 10,174,01.

B. The lower court’s determination is reasonable in order for the victim to pay the Defendant separate expenses, service charges, etc. concerning the F’s divorce procedures or the agreed procedures related to the divorce procedures or divorce, and normally to proceed with the agreement procedures related to the divorce procedures or divorce procedures in a foreign country, such as the Switzerland.