A. Defendant 1) In light of the fact-finding (Occupational Embezzlement) misunderstanding (Occupational Embezzlement) as to the instant I project, etc., the Defendant cannot be deemed to have had the intention of embezzlement or illegal acquisition in regard to the fact that the Defendant and other members of the instant secondary board of directors have received KRW 500,000 from the instant cooperative funds to receive KRW 500,00 from the Defendant’s personnel expenses, and the Defendant paid KRW 500,000 as the Defendant’s personnel expenses among the human resources management expenses and the other members were aware that the said funds were executed. In light of the fact that the Defendant and other members of the instant secondary board of directors have no objection to determining the personnel expenses as KRW 50,00,00,000,000 for the Defendant’s personnel expenses, the Defendant did not have the intention of embezzlement or illegal acquisition. Nevertheless, the lower court convicted the Defendant of embezzlement among the facts charged in the instant case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment.

B. Prosecutor 1) In light of the erroneous determination of facts (the violation of the Framework Act on Cooperatives), the lower court erred by misapprehending the fact that the lower court acquitted on the violation of the Framework Act on Cooperatives among the facts charged in the instant case, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion

① According to the articles of association of the instant cooperative, approval of the business plan and budget shall be subject to the resolution of the general meeting, and the preparation of the business plan and budget shall be subject to the resolution of the board of directors. The minutes of the inaugural general meeting submitted by the Defendant are doubtful, and the defendant did not undergo a separate

② If the Defendant did not notify all other members of the details of the business execution for a considerable period of time, excluding the Defendant, and if the Defendant does not punish all specific and individual businesses on the ground that they need not undergo a resolution at a general meeting, this would be contrary to the legislative intent of the Framework Act on Cooperatives.