The prosecutor's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal: (a) In the case of KRW 3 million, which was paid under the name of the printing official expenses, the printing official expenses may be used for the purpose of compensating actual expenses necessary for the performance of duties in light of the relevant articles of association, etc. related to the Victim B Association (hereinafter “victim Association”); (b) in the case of office operating expenses and KRW 1.2 million, each of which was paid under the name of office operating expenses, and (c) in the case of KRW 1.2 million, the Defendant determined and used the payment as his own wages at the expense of the Victim Association, etc. kept by himself for reasons such as shortage of the printing official expenses even though the Defendant did not have any grounds for payment; and (d) thus, the Defendant

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the Defendant of the facts charged in this case is erroneous.

2. The summary of the facts charged in the instant case is the managing director of the Victim B Association from around 2012 to around 2016, and a person who has overall control over the affairs of the Association, including the management of funds of the said Association.

On August 26, 2016, for the Victim Association, the Defendant arbitrarily transferred KRW 3 million to the account in the name of the Defendant’s wife while keeping funds owned by the Victim Association from the account (Account Number C) to the account in the name of the Defendant’s wife, and used it as the Defendant’s registration fee at around that time. On January 12, 2017, the Defendant embezzled KRW 2.4 million in cash owned by the Victim Association as the Defendant’s living expenses, etc.

3. Determination

A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined by the lower court, the lower court determined that the money used by the Defendant was paid from the victim’s association as “sales expenses” or “actual operating expenses and outing equipment,” and that the Defendant paid the Defendant’s office at the cost level of compensating for actual expenses related to the provision of the Defendant’s office while working as the managing director of the Association.