A. The sentence imposed by the prosecutor by the court below on the defendant (amounting to KRW 8,00,000) is too unhued and unreasonable.

B. Defendant 1) misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles) The Defendant applied for the teaching staff of the Arts Treatment Center affiliated with F University (hereinafter “Art Treatment Center”) as a teaching staff of F University (hereinafter “Art Treatment Center”) at the implied reduction of the victim F University (hereinafter “F University”) and used part of the amount as operating expenses, publicity expenses, and teaching staff of the Arts Treatment Center. The Defendant did not intend to acquire the defrauded intentionally or unlawfully.

B) The Defendant provided the curriculum of the program as a key instructor and auxiliary instructors as a key instructor in the program progress L in L, and was aware that he received the lecture fee under that name, there was no intention of defraudation or defraudation.

C) The Defendant was in custody of embezzlement as an account in Q from the end of February 2013.

As the money to be paid to the O research institute has been paid in cash to AB, the actual operator of the research institute, there is no embezzlement.

2) The sentence sentenced by the lower court to the Defendant is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the lower court based on the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court, the Defendant, at least by recommending the appointment of a teaching assistant in the art therapy, mainly works as the teaching assistant in the art therapy center, and the Defendant, as a doctor, obtained a total of KRW 43,961,210 by recommending G, etc. to the F University as a major administrative assistant in the art therapy, with the intention to pay only a part of the money paid as the teaching assistant in the art therapy, to a person who works as a major administrative assistant in the art therapy.