The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the embezzlement of land sale proceeds is acquitted.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The prosecutor (as to the embezzlement of KRW 3 million among the facts charged in the instant case) states to the effect that the Defendant consistently consumed this part of the money by mind. On the contrary, the Defendant and H did not prepare any document, such as a loan certificate, etc. between the victim and H, and on April 27, 2012, in view of the fact that the registration of the right to claim the transfer of ownership was completed with respect to the instant apartment under the name of H’s wife, a security for this part of the money.

Furthermore, since the statement of the defendant or H against this is not reliable, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant or H on this part is unfair as it misleads the facts.

B. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts (as to embezzlement of land purchase price among the facts charged in the instant case), the Defendant’s use of the purchase price of KRW 17 million for the instant land is recognized. However, the Defendant and the victim sold the instant land to F for the purpose of offering the instant apartment as collateral and settling the loan amount of KRW 28 million borrowed from H before the beginning, and the purchase price is also paid to H as agreed with the victim, and the Defendant paid KRW 11 million to H, and KRW 5 million to the victim. Since the remainder of KRW 1 million was used as necessary expenses for the sale of the instant land, there is no money embezzled by the Defendant. Accordingly, the lower judgment that convicted the Defendant of this part is erroneous and unreasonable.

2. We also examine the judgment of mistake of facts and the defendant's assertion of mistake of facts.

The Defendant’s embezzlement of KRW 3 million in the charge of the charge is located in the Gyeonggi-do Do in April 2012.