The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

146,00,000 won from the defendant.

1. Regarding the summary of the grounds for appeal (fact-finding) that the Defendant received from E on August 19, 2008 (No. 100 million won No. 8) from E, this is merely a loan and does not receive money.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found this part of the facts charged guilty is erroneous by misunderstanding the facts and affecting the judgment.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant recognized that the Defendant received money from the E to the meaning of misappropriation in return for the remaining KRW 46 million, excluding KRW 100,000,000,000, out of the amount stated in the facts charged by E.

In addition, it is recognized that the above KRW 100 million received money as a check from E.

Therefore, the issue of this case is whether the defendant received KRW 100 million from E is the money borrowed or donated.

In the crime of giving and receiving property in breach of trust or the crime of giving and receiving property in breach of trust, if the recipient claims that he/she borrowed the property from the person who received property in return for an illegal solicitation, but the borrower actually borrowed the property, the issue of whether the borrower actually borrowed the property should be determined by comprehensively taking into account all objective circumstances revealed by evidence, such as the motive for giving and receiving the property from the person who received property in breach of trust or the crime of giving and receiving property in breach of trust or the crime of giving and receiving property in breach of trust, the reason and method for delivery, the relationship between the person who received property in question and the person who received property in breach of trust, the position and career of the two parties, the necessity and possibility of borrowing the property from the person who received property in question, the amount and means of borrowing the property from the person who received property in breach of trust, the economic situation of the person who received property in question, the amount

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Do3943 Decided September 7, 2007, etc.). Comprehensively taking into account the circumstances presented by the lower court and the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant is KRW 100 million from E.