When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

From June 2014, the defendant is the representative director of the corporation D in Gwangjin-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City, who is engaged in the affairs such as the payment of workers' wages, the deduction of national pension contributions, the payment of insurance premiums, etc.

around November 2015, the Defendant, at the above D office, deducted KRW 111,061 as employee contributions from the national pension insurance premium, and embezzled the amount of KRW 10,74,985 in total, which was deducted from the amount of the national pension premium, as employee contributions, from the amount of the national pension premium, and then arbitrarily used it for the personal purpose at around that time, from November 2015 to July 2016, the Defendant embezzled the amount of KRW 10,74,985 in total, which was deducted from the amount of the national pension premium to the victim F, G, H, H, I, J,K, L, M, P, Q, Q, E, M, T, T, T, T, T, V, W, X, Z, and AA’s respective benefits.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Investigative report (Reporting on ascertaining the arrears of national pension premiums);

1. A written confirmation of subscription details for the determination of pension benefits;

1. A reply to the details of the arrears of the national pension insurance premiums and to the request for cooperation in investigations (the National Pension Service's branch office) (Defendants only did not pay the deducted contributions to the National Pension Insurance Service because their business is difficult and there was no intention to obtain unlawful profits therefrom;

The argument is asserted.

In light of the purpose of the source collection system, in a case where an employer paid a worker a salary after deducting employee contributions from the national pension premium, the employer immediately keeps the deducted employee contributions for the employee as above.

Therefore, in accordance with the above legal principle, the defendant's arbitrary use of the national pension premium without paying the national pension premium cannot be exempted from the liability for crime of embezzlement, and since the record recognizes that the defendant did not use it at his own discretion under any other name and not keep it separately, the defendant's intent of unlawful acquisition can be recognized.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion.