Defendant

All appeals filed by A, B, and Prosecutor are dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

가. 피고인 A 1) 사실오인 가) 원심 별지 범죄일람표(1) 순번 30 내지 39번 기재 부분 이 부분 공소사실은 ㈜Q(이하 ‘Q’라 한다)가 ㈜R(이하 ‘R’이라 한다)의 자금을 같은 범죄일람표(1) 순번 1 내지 15 기재와 같이 사용함으로써 발생한 부외부채를 변제한 것이므로 횡령이 아니고, 횡령의 범의도 없다.

In other words, while Q&A transactions with the L&M and the L&M (hereinafter “A&M”), it is difficult for Q&A to pay approximately KRW 5.4 billion to R due to the performance of obligations to Q&R arising from previous embezzlement in the course of pursuing embezzlement issues.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that recognized the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) or the occupational embezzlement as to this part of the facts charged is erroneous

B) The part of the facts charged in No. 40 of the crime sight table (1) No. 40 attached to the court below's decision shall be the case where the new capital capital resolution committee (hereinafter referred to as "new capital resolution committee").

(3) On May 2, 2012, the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the lower court recognized the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) against this part of the facts charged, and thereby adversely affected the conclusion of the judgment, even though Defendant A did not intervene in the process of selling stocks, and did not have the status of a custodian of stocks at the time, Defendant A did not have the status of a custodian. (c) The lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the crime of violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) was committed in the lower judgment.