The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for two years.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the victim Hyundai Capital.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. In relation to the embezzlement of misunderstanding of facts victims T, Defendant 1: (a) the Defendant remitted 5 million won of the money remitted from the victim to the AS account designated by the victim; and (b) remitted 5 million won of the money to the purchase price of BMW vehicle; and (c) the above amount should be excluded from the damaged amount; (d) the judgment of the court below which found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, is erroneous in the misapprehension of facts. In addition, with regard to the fraud against the victim Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd., Ltd., the Defendant was detained in another case, and the Defendant did not have any criminal intent to commit fraud because he did not pay the vehicle installments, but there was an error of law by misunderstanding the facts, which affected the conclusion of the judgment; (b) the court below found the Defendant guilty of this part of the facts charged, other than the allegation of unfair sentencing, was erroneous in understanding the fact that the Defendant returned the vehicle back to the victim F at latest, promised to resolve the Fund.

B. The lower court’s sentencing is too uneasible and unreasonable.

Judgment on misunderstanding of Facts

A. The following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court’s duly adopted and investigated evidence regarding embezzlement of the victim T, namely, (i) the Defendant paid KRW 5 million to AS on June 26, 2013, but there is no evidence to deem that the victim was returned through AS; and (ii) the victim was hard to find any special reason to receive the refund of the said amount through AS (the victim also stated that the police was returned KRW 10 million), and (iii) the Defendant and V was much detailed between the Defendant and V in light of the details of the Defendant’s deposit transaction.