A. In regard to the crime of occupational embezzlement (1) since the Defendant returned most of the money transferred from the account under the name of the Q disabled Persons Activity Support Center (hereinafter “ Q”) to the Defendant’s account to the Q account, or used it for Q operating expenses such as wages of employees, the crime of embezzlement is not established.

(2) As to the crime of unlawful use by private person, at the time when the defendant affixed the seal of R, AB, AA, and X in Q’s activity support benefit record, he/she received implied consent from the above persons.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) Determination of misunderstanding of facts is acknowledged based on the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the court below regarding the crime of occupational embezzlement, namely, ① the Defendant transferred the amount equivalent to KRW 226 million from Q account to the agricultural cooperative account under the name of the Defendant, ② The details of the Defendant’s account transaction in the agricultural cooperative account under the name of the Defendant (Evidence No. 1188) appears to have used most of the funds transferred by the Defendant to another person by means of account transfer, insurance premium payment, cash withdrawal, etc. ③ the Defendant voluntarily stated that the Defendant used the money transferred from Q account from Q account to the Defendant’s account at the time of the prosecutor’s investigation; ④ the Defendant used most of the money transferred from Q account to Q account, but the Defendant did not respond to the specific purpose of use; in light of all the circumstances such as the details of deposits in Q account entry and the receipt of operating expenses, and the payment of money transfer money, etc., the Defendant’s assertion that it was difficult to reverse the Defendant’s personal funds for the purpose of preserving Q account.