The judgment below

Of them, the part on Defendant B shall be reversed.

Defendant

B A person shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than four months.

except that this judgment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant A (1) In light of the misunderstanding of facts and the misunderstanding of legal principles, Defendant B alone committed an embezzlement regardless of Defendant A, and the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles.

(2) The sentence imposed by the lower court on Defendant A (six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

B. The punishment sentenced by the court below against Defendant B (two months of imprisonment and two years of suspended execution) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on Defendant A’s assertion

A. Article 30 of the Criminal Act provides that two or more persons jointly commit a crime. In order to establish a joint principal offender, a subjective element is required to commit a crime through functional control by a joint doctor, which is an objective element, and the intention of joint process is to be integrated for the purpose of committing a specific criminal act with a common intent, and to move one’s own intent to implement a crime by using another person’s act. It does not require any legal penalty, but is a combination of two or more persons to jointly process a crime and to realize a crime. Thus, if two or more persons jointly intend to commit a crime without the process of the whole mother, a joint principal offender is established if there is a combination of doctors by going through mutual consent or impliedly.

(2) The lower court’s judgment based on the above legal principles and evidence duly admitted and examined by the lower court, i.e., the Defendant B borrowed money from the instant vehicle as collateral in the absence of ownership upon the Defendant A’s request from the investigative agency to the lower court to provide money for the use of the instant vehicle, i.e., the Defendant B, as well as the following circumstances acknowledged by the aforementioned evidence.