The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four years.

When referring to the defendant, misunderstanding the facts of the defendant and misunderstanding the legal principles, and when referring to the victim I or less corporation, only the company shall be omitted and its trade name shall be entered from the date following the first indication.

Despite the aggravated financial situation, the Defendant was expected to be able to continue to operate the Company D with the proceeds of the supply of gold punishment to I, making the actual gold punishment, receiving advance 146,850,000 won from I, and did not deceiving I with the intent of defraudation.

In other words, D, on June 9, 2016, before entering into a gold production contract with I, requested from I for a gold production of 32 custody and 43 custody from April 2016, and began to create a gold model from May 2016, and made a sample of a gold pool of 43 custody around June 2016 and delivered it to I, and revised the following.

In addition, in the case of one 32 gold punishment, the production was being initiated by the process of 60-70% around July 2016.

In doing so, on May 23, 2016, F attached the claim against D's ELD on a gold market and caused interference with the production of gold. The Defendant, even if 43 gold punishment is completed, was kept in custody by bringing it to D outside in order to supply it normally, and in the case of 32 gold punishment, the F was no longer brought to around July 15, 2016.

The Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (hereinafter referred to as the "Act on the Aggravated Punishment of Specific Economic Crimes").

The Act on Regulation and Punishment of Violations (Embezzlement) and Concealment of Criminal Proceeds (hereinafter referred to as the "Regulation on Concealment of Criminal Proceeds") is only called the "Act on Regulation and Punishment of Concealment of Criminal Proceeds."

Since violation D obtained the permission of the court for a transaction exceeding five million won after the rehabilitation procedure began in 2011, D operated funds by means of financing from the branch and paying the transaction price to Q.

Therefore, the defendant was in the corporate bank account of D on July 11, 2016.

54.9