Of the judgment of the court below of first instance, the part on Defendant B and the judgment of the court below of second instance and Defendant W.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Each sentence of Defendant B by the lower court is too unreasonable.

B. Defendant W (1) There was no intention to commit an embezzlement by mistake of facts.

(2) Each sentence of the lower court’s decision on unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. In full view of the overall sentencing conditions and arguments as shown in the records and arguments against Defendant B, and the fact that the Defendant agreed with the victim E of the first instance judgment, the sentence against Defendant B is too unreasonable.

On the other hand, in full view of the above sentencing conditions, the punishment of the above defendant in the second instance court is too unreasonable.

3. As to Defendant W

A. Prior to the judgment on Defendant W’s assertion of ex officio, this Court decided to hold a joint hearing of each appeal case against the judgment of the court below. The crime of the judgment of the court of second instance and the crime of Defendant W among the judgment of the court of third instance are concurrent crimes under the former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and one sentence should be imposed pursuant to Article 38(1) of the Criminal Act. Thus, the above decisions with respect to Defendant W cannot be maintained any longer.

B. Although there is a ground for ex officio reversal on the ground of appeal as seen above, the Defendant W’s argument of mistake of facts is still subject to the judgment of this court, and this is to be examined.

Unless there are special circumstances to deem that the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance was clearly erroneous in light of the spirit of substantial direct examination adopted by the Korean Criminal Procedure Act, or the first instance judgment on the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance is clearly unfair in full view of the results of the first instance examination and the results of the additional examination of evidence conducted by the time the argument in the appellate trial is concluded, the appellate court shall determine the credibility of the statement made by the witness of the first instance.