The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The defendant shall be innocent.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. In fact-misunderstanding and legal principles, the Defendant, as well as D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) in which the Defendant jointly invested with the complainant E (hereinafter “F”), operated the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) as the representative director. At the time, the Defendant directly managed 93 bonds listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant bonds”) and documents pertaining thereto (hereinafter “the instant bonds documents”).

The Defendant, while running a business with E and Dong, used five floors in Songpa-gu Seoul Metropolitan L Building (hereinafter “L building”) and decided to terminate the business, and transferred the Defendant’s office to the MM building N (hereinafter “M office”) in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City. The instant bonds also transferred, stored, and managed the instant bonds along with the relocation of the office.

From March 2017, the Defendant and E used the Songpa-gu Seoul building C (hereinafter “B office”) together, but the Defendant still kept the claims documents in the M office.

In other words, the claim documents of this case had no record of the B office, which is the place of crime as stated in the facts charged, once.

In addition, the claim documents of this case were under the management of the defendant from the beginning, and the defendant sold the claim of this case to a third party under an agreement with E, so it cannot be recognized as an intention of unlawful acquisition or a thief, and therefore, it cannot be deemed that the defendant stolen another's property with the intention of unlawful acquisition.

Nevertheless, the lower court found the Defendant guilty of the facts charged of this case. In so doing, it erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (an amount of KRW 3 million) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination on the misapprehension of facts and misapprehension of legal principles

A. The summary of the instant facts charged is that the public prosecutor around September 2017 set the date and time of the instant crime from March 2017 to October 2017.