From May 1, 2011 to April 30, 2013, the Defendant has been engaged in management affairs, such as membership fees and withdrawals, in the victim B, a group of friendship groups consisting of 20 members.

Around June 12, 2011, the Defendant: (a) took over the deposit account (C) in the name of 26,870,629 won of the remaining membership fee deposited by 26,870,629 won from the Plaintiff’s member to the bank account (D) in the name of 26,870,629 won; and (b) took over the deposit account in the name of 26,870,629 won from the 169-63 branch of 169,000,000 won to the bank account in the name of 26,870,629 won from the 16,870,629 branch of 169,000 won to the 25,000 won in the name of 1,545, Busan, and embezzled it for the Defendant’s personal purpose, such as business funds, around that time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. A copy of a deposit passbook;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to inquiries about details of credit transactions;

1. Relevant Article 356 of the Criminal Act and Articles 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of criminal facts;

1. The reason for the sentencing of selective punishment of imprisonment [the scope of recommendation] The reason for the punishment of embezzlement and breach of trust (the amount of punishment shall be less than KRW 100,00) is that there is no basic area (the amount of damage from April to one year and four months) [the decision of sentence] and the amount of damage has not yet been recovered, the victim's severe punishment is relieved of the damage, the defendant is sentenced in light of the fact that the defendant wants to commit the crime, the circumstances of the crime and the circumstances after the crime, etc., but the defendant appears to have committed the crime, and there is no criminal history in excess of the same kind and fine, the defendant's age, occupation, environment, etc., so it is reasonable to give the defendant an opportunity to recover damage without detention, so no statutory restraint is made