The judgment below

Criminal sight table 1.94 " February 16, 2015" is " February 13, 2015."

A. 1,111,956,923 out of the amount of embezzlement of the lower court by misunderstanding the facts and legal principles, as the Defendant transferred the damaged company to material, labor, transportation expenses, etc. for the victimized company, or delivered to G representative director of the victimized company under the pretext of entertainment expenses, etc., there was no intention of embezzlement.

B. The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing (three years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. Determination on the misunderstanding of facts and legal principles 1) The unlawful acquisition intent of embezzlement in the course of occupational embezzlement refers to the intention to dispose of another person's property in violation of his/her occupational duty, such as in fact or in law, as he/she owns the property of another person for the purpose of seeking the benefit of himself/herself or a third party, and there is an intention to return or compensate after

Even if the intention of illegal acquisition can be recognized.

The crime of embezzlement refers to any act that realizes the intent of unlawful acquisition, and the crime of embezzlement is established when there is an objective act that is recognizable to the outside of the intent of unlawful acquisition (see Supreme Court Decision 2016Do3677, May 12, 2016, etc.). 2) The following circumstances are acknowledged according to the evidence adopted and examined by the lower court.

① From October 18, 2009 to February 20, 2017, the Defendant was working as an employee in charge of accounting as a victim F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim”) (hereinafter “victim”) and managed the company’s funds. However, the Defendant was in custody of the passbook, and was also aware of the passbook and password for Internet transaction.

Of the funds of the company, the amount of less than 10 million won has been remitted directly by the defendant via the Internet, and the amount of more than 10 million won has been prepared a bank total statement, and it has been transferred with the seal of the representative director.

② When paying the wages of the victimized company, the Defendant obtained the approval of the representative director by fraudulent means, and remitted part of them from the damaged company’s account to her husband B.