The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant, at the time of the filing of the appeal, who was the husband, received money from the victim E in relation to the business, and received KRW 16 million from his bank account around September 2010, and was never aware of the fact that the said KRW 16 million was the down payment to purchase the F and G (hereinafter “the instant forest”). As to the said KRW 16 million, there was no consignment relationship with the victim E as well as there was no intent of embezzlement.

Nevertheless, the court below found the defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. The court below erred by misunderstanding facts and affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. The judgment of the court below is based on the evidence duly adopted and examined. ① At the time of early September 201, 201, the Defendant, a licensed real estate agent of the Defendant, was urged to purchase the forest of this case in the vicinity of the Defendant’s residence, and the owner was deposited in the bank account in the name of the Defendant as the down payment. However, the contract related to the forest of this case was not concluded, and each statement at the victim E’s investigation agency to the effect that the Defendant and A requested to return the down payment on March 201, 201, and most of them were not returned, each statement is considerably specific and consistent in relation to the date and time of purchase recommendation, contents of purchase recommendation, deposit of down payment and details of down payment, circumstances after deposit, etc. ② the victim was recommended from the victim’s forest of this case after early September 2010 to purchase the down payment of this case.