Does the Attorney General's error in instructing a jury to convict a defendant of embezzling a vehicle constitute a harmless error?

violation is measured against the harmless error test of Chapman v. California (1967) 386 U.S. 18, 24 [17 L. Ed. 2d 705]. [Citation.]" (People v. Samaniego (2009) 172 Cal.App.4th 1148, 1165.) Under that test, we ask whether beyond a reasonable doubt the jury verdict would have been the same absent the error. (Ibid.) We cannot say, on this record, beyond a reasonable doubt, that defendant would have been found guilty of embezzling a vehicle had the jury been properly instructed. The Attorney General does not argue otherwise.