If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

The defendant has overall control over the affairs of the above union as the president of the victims E cooperative in Daegu-gu (hereinafter referred to as the "cooperative").

1. On February 22, 2010, the Defendant: (a) received a copy of a check from G from the president of the central federation of cooperatives in his/her own face value of KRW 10,000,000 from G in his/her own account and embezzled the trade name in the Daegu Suwon-gu, Daegu-gu, where the trade name is unknown; and (b) received from G to the association as a subsidy for the activation and operation of the cooperative; and (c) did not deposit it into the association’s account; and (d)

2. On April 6, 2011, the Defendant: (a) received a check from the above G at the above restaurant under the above conditions as above from the said G, and was in the occupational custody for the partnership with a face value of KRW 10 million; and (b) did not deposit this into the association account; (c) did not deposit it in the union account at around that time, and embezzled it by arbitrarily consuming at the Daegu Won.

3. On December 18, 2012, the Defendant: (a) received from the above G at the above restaurant, under the above name, a check with a face value of KRW 10 million from the said G and embezzled it for the Association’s account; and (b) did not deposit it into the association’s account; and (c) used it at will at the Daegu KRW 1,00,000 at around that time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning interrogation of the police officer in relation to G;

1. Each police statement made to H, I, and J;

1. A written accusation;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to data submitted by the accusers, copies of checks and false deposits, details of suspect's return, and details of subsidies;

1. Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act and the selection of fines for criminal facts;

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

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The grounds for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act include: (a) that the Defendant recognized his/her mistake and did not repeat the crime; and (b) appeals the prior action of the fine; (c) the restoration of the damage was fully completed; and (d) the Defendant.