The judgment below

The part against the Defendants is reversed.

Defendant

A and B shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

(b).

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Defendant B (1) misunderstanding of the facts or misunderstanding of the legal principles (guilty part) Defendant did not have entrusted the release on bail or in custody itself as stated in the facts constituting the crime in the judgment below, nor did he participated in the above release on bail at all.

In addition, since Korea, E was the president of G and the defendant was aware of it, there is no consignment relationship with the victim.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to Defendant B (one hundred months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

B. As to the Defendants’ occupational embezzlement by mistake of facts or misapprehension of legal principles (non-guilty part) and embezzlement, the Defendants knew that the instant release on bail (R/S) of this case (R/S) was not owned by E, but by E, the victim F, and at least the goods entrusted by E, not by E, the Defendant was entrusted by a third party. The Defendants knew that the instant release on bail (R/S) of this case (R/S) of this case, brogy brogy, flag brog brog brog brog bros, lue bro bro bro brog brog brogs, lue bro bro bro bro bro bro bro bro bro bro bro bro bro bro bro bro bro bro, 3.7 gro bro bro bro 3.

It is reasonable to view it.

As long as he/she has participated in the act of embezzlement of E as a common principal offender, the intent of embezzlement is fully recognized.

B) As to Defendant A’s occupational embezzlement, in the case of this part of the crime that Defendant A took part in Defendant B’s occupational embezzlement, the crime of embezzlement is established pursuant to the main sentence of Article 33 of the Criminal Act. However, the punishment of embezzlement is subject to the proviso of the same Article in the case of the excessive punishment.

Therefore, the lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine that acquitted Defendant A of this part of the grounds for the crime of embezzlement.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendants (Defendant A: 10 months of imprisonment with prison labor, 2 years of suspended sentence, 10 months of imprisonment with prison labor) is deemed unfair.

2. Determination

A. Defendant B’s assertion of mistake or misapprehension of legal doctrine.