The judgment below

Of them, the part of conviction against the Defendants (including the part of acquittal) shall be reversed.

Defendant

A. Imprisonment.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendants (1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles, ① Defendant A held a loan claim against the victim company as the representative director of the victim company, and Defendant A received money from the victim company as a repayment of the above loan claim. Thus, the victim company’s money is not embezzled.

② Defendant B was residing in Canada before June 7, 2008, and was not involved in the operation of the victim company. Thus, Defendant B cannot be deemed to have conspiredd with Defendant A and embezzlement.

Nevertheless, the court below held that the defendants conspired to embezzlement the funds of the victim company based on each of the statements of J and K without credibility. Thus, the court below erred by misapprehending the rules of evidence or by misapprehending the legal principles, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

(2) Each sentence of the lower court on unreasonable sentencing (Defendant A: 10 months of imprisonment, 2 years of suspended sentence, 6 months of suspended sentence and 2 years of suspended sentence) is too unreasonable.

B. In full view of the prosecutor (1) erroneous determination of facts (A) the Defendant’s reliable statement of the J in charge of managing the funds of the victim company regarding the Defendants’ occupational breach of trust, and the Defendant’s statement that Defendant A lent money to N on February 27, 2008 is difficult to believe, and the victim company borrowed money from the network M on or around December 17, 2007 and paid interest of KRW 20 million to the victim company at one time on April 30, 2008, when the victim company borrowed money from the network M and did not pay interest, it is very exceptional that the victim company paid interest of KRW 20 million as stated in the instant facts charged.

(B) According to the evidence submitted by the prosecutor concerning the Defendants’ occupational embezzlement as of January 2, 2009, the Defendants conspired and embezzled the amount of KRW 54 million of the victim company on January 2, 2009.

(C) Defendant A’s.