However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The defendant is a member of the D church in his/her own city, and E is a person who managed the funds of the F Committee by the general affairs of the D church F Committee, and the D church F Committee is a committee established for the purpose of awarding scholarships to the Buddhist students.

On April 7, 2011, the Defendant kept funds of the Victim D church F Committee at the above D church.

E refers to the request for withdrawal of 30 million won out of the funds of the D church F Committee, and E has withdrawn 30 million won on the same day in response thereto and delivered to the defendant.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the money of the victim D church in collusion with E.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness G;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. In full view of the circumstances such as the copy of the church passbook, the F Committee’s accounting books, written opinions, and the D church Basic Act (the defendant asserts that the D church F Committee is an association that is not a legal entity independent of the victim D church, but the said Committee was established as a special committee within the church for the operation of the victim church’s scholarship relief fund, and the church believers returned to the church and carried out its duties; the above Committee did not specify the members; the above Committee did not have a regular meeting; there was no regular meeting; and the operation rules are not stipulated, the above Committee was equipped with the substance of an independent association from the victim church.

The application of the law shall not be deemed a non-corporate entity.

1. Article 355 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and Articles 355 (Selection of Imprisonment);

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution - The fact that the Defendant appears to have received 30 million won from the victim’s assembly for the interim settlement of retirement allowances and used it for the repayment of damage, and that there is no history of criminal punishment since 1984.