The judgment below

The guilty portion shall be reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

However, from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Progress of judgment;

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of occupational embezzlement among the facts charged in the case 2012Gohap732 and the ancillary facts charged in the case 2012Gohap811, acquitted the primary facts charged in the case 2012Gohap811 and acquitted the remainder of the ancillary facts, and sentenced the Defendant to a suspended sentence of four years for a three-year period of imprisonment.

B. The Defendant appealed on the ground of erroneous determination of facts as to the above occupational embezzlement part among the conviction part of the lower judgment, on the ground of erroneous determination of facts as to the acquittal part (excluding the first B fraud part of the primary facts charged in the case 2012 high-liability811) and unreasonable sentencing as to the guilty part.

The trial prior to remand accepted the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding of facts and rejected the prosecutor's assertion of misunderstanding of facts, but sentenced the defendant's imprisonment with prison labor for one year and six months heavier than that of the court below as to the remaining part of the 2012 Gohap732 case.

C. Defendant filed an appeal on the grounds of misapprehension of legal principles and unfair sentencing. The Supreme Court rejected the prosecutor’s appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing by failing to submit a statement of grounds of appeal on the appeal of unfair sentencing within a lawful period, and accordingly, the prosecutor’s appeal is unlawful. Therefore, the prosecutor’s order of imprisonment and one year and six months heavier than the lower court’s imprisonment without prison labor, even though the prosecutor did not file a legitimate appeal on the grounds of unfair sentencing, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment. In so doing, the lower court reversed the conviction portion of the

2. Therefore, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the case of 2012 Gohap732, excluding the finalized part of the judgment of the court below.

The lower court rendered a single sentence on the crime of occupational embezzlement in this part of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) and the ancillary charge of the case 2012 Gohap81 regarding the crime of occupational embezzlement as concurrent crimes in the former part of Article 37