If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

The Defendant is the president of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City, Nowon-gu University from March 1, 2008 to February 28, 2012, and has overall control over administrative and accounting affairs of the above schools.

Notwithstanding the fact that a private school foundation established and operated by a private school foundation could not transfer or lend the income belonging to school expenses to other accounts, the Defendant appointed a law firmF (Seoul High Court 2008Na25741) as an attorney of the said foundation in connection with the instant lawsuit brought by D, who was a professor of the said school, to the said school foundation E on February 11, 2008 (Seoul High Court 2008Na25741), and used the income belonging to the school expenses accounts from March 20, 2008 to February 21, 201, including: (a) 4,400,000 won as the above attorney’s fee, from the time when he/she arbitrarily uses the income belonging to the school expenses accounts by taking advantage of the total amount of KRW 39,60,000,000,000 for nine times in total, as indicated in the attached list of crimes, and simultaneously transfers the income belonging to the school expenses accounts

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination of the suspect of H by the prosecution (including the I and J respective statements);

1. Each police interrogation protocol against K and I;

1. Each police statement of L/M;

1. Investigation report (Attachment of disbursement data related to this case);

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the written accusation;

1. Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act (the occupation of occupational embezzlement) concerning the facts constituting an offense and the main sentence of Article 73-2 and Article 29 (6) of the Private School Act (the occupation of transfer of income from school expenses accounting);

1. Articles 40 and 50 of the Criminal Act of the Commercial Concurrent Crimes;

1. Selection of each alternative fine for punishment;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act to increase concurrent crimes;

1. Articles 70 and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Judgment on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act

1. The summary of the assertion is that the defendant and his defense counsel are all aware of facts constituting the crime as indicated in the judgment, but ① the defendant is embezzled and Private School Act.