The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

However, for a period of two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. Legal reasoning is that deposit claims in the name of deceased D (hereinafter “ deceased”) who is the inheritee, the inheritee, belong to the co-ownership of co-inheritors at the time of inheritance commencement. Thus, the Defendant, one of the co-inheritors, who is a co-inheritors, acquires a divided deposit claim according to his/her share of inheritance.

Therefore, it is deemed that the Defendant solely claimed and received part of the above deposit claims acquired by division within the scope of his share of inheritance.

Even if the defendant acquired any property profit;

shall not be deemed to exist.

Nevertheless, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles that found the defendant guilty of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud).

B. The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment, three years of suspended sentence, and two hundred hours of community service) is too unreasonable.

2. Judgment on the misapprehension of legal principles

A. The lower court determined that the Defendant committed a crime of violating the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) in full view of the following circumstances recognized by comprehensively taking account of the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court.

1) The victim Samsung Securities Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ Samsung Securities”) merely pays the deposit only to the claim for deposit payment made with the consent of all co-inheritors in the case of a co-inheritors’s death, and does not pay the deposit in the case of a co-inheritors’s independent claim for deposit payment. As such, if the Defendant filed a claim for deposit payment with the deceased as one of co-inheritors, the victim would not pay the deposit under the deceased’s name, and at the time of the Defendant’s claim for deposit payment, the Defendant expressed his/her intent to seek the payment of the deposit claim corresponding to the inherited portion as one of co-inheritors as a co-inheritors, not to mention that he/she himself/herself or it is a legitimate representative of the deceased who is still alive.