Where the defendant fails to pay the above fine, one hundred thousand won shall be one day.

From April 2007 to March 2013, the Defendant, as the head of the branch of the branch of the Korea Beauty Association of the Korean Beauty Association of Korea, has been in charge of managing and supervising the revenue and expenditure of property, such as membership fees, event expenses, etc.

The Defendant deposited part of the money deposited in the special account account that manages the membership fees, sanitary education expenses, support funds, etc. of the members of the said branch office into the agricultural cooperative account in the name of the head of the said branch office and managed it as non-funds. On December 19, 2012, the Defendant made D around December 19, 2012 transfer KRW 100,000 from the said account to the Defendant’s personal German travel account in the name of the Defendant, and embezzled at will at that time by arbitrarily consuming it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the accused by the prosecution (including D parts of the statement);

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on a copy of a bankbook (Agricultural Cooperatives, D);

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment for a crime;

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

1. The Defendant and the defense counsel regarding the claim that the act does not violate the social rules of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the Provisional Payment Order. Even if the Defendant received 100,000 won as personal travel expenses from the funds of the victim’s branch, the Defendant was supported by the victim’s funds.

Even if there is sufficient room to regard it as a welfare expense and it is reasonable to view it as an act that does not contravene the social norms, and thus, the illegality is excluded. However, in light of the circumstances, etc. of the instant crime, which may be acknowledged by the evidence duly examined by the court, such an act meets the requirements of acts that do not violate the social rules prescribed in Article 20 of the Criminal Act, such as legitimacy of motive or purpose, reasonableness of means or method, protection of legal interests, balance between legal interests and legal interests, etc.

shall not be deemed to exist.

Therefore, the above assertion is valid.