A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Of the facts charged in the instant case, the charge of embezzlement of KRW 53,500,000 is acquitted.

Punishment of the crime

When the victim D, who was a high school constructor, was investigated in connection with the loan-related case of the inland fisheries cooperative, during the course of performing his/her duties, the Defendant: (a) on April 2012, when the victim was appointed to appoint C lawyer as a defense counsel; (b) on April 20, 2012, he/she was transferred KRW 50 million in the name of the appointment fee to the agricultural bank account in the name of E, which is the cause of the office of C attorney-at-law; (c) on April 20, 2012, only KRW 30 million out of them was paid to C attorney-at-law as the appointment fee; and (d) on April 23, 2012, the remainder amount of KRW 20 million was transferred to the agricultural bank account in the name of F, his/her father-at-law, and was embezzled using it at his/her discretion at around that time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Entry of the witness D part of the five public trial records;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspect against each part of the defendant by the prosecution;

1. Statement made by each prosecutor's office with regard to D;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. CWritten answers;

1. Application of statutes, such as the details of sending a letter of inquiry about the current status of an interview, such as each recording book, a certified copy of a letter of demand for judgment;

1. Determination as to the assertion of the Defendant and the defense counsel under the pertinent Article of the Criminal Act and Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts

1. The gist of the assertion is that the Defendant paid KRW 20 million out of KRW 50 million to the injured party for the repayment of the Defendant’s obligation to the victimized party, and only KRW 30 million was paid as the attorney’s fee, and thus, the Defendant did not embezzled KRW 20 million.

2. Determination

A. According to the evidence adopted and examined by the court, the following circumstances are revealed.

1) Examining the details of the account transactions in the name of Nonghyup (102-104 pages of investigation records) in the name of C Attorney-at-law office, the victim’s father G was found to have remitted KRW 50 million over three times on April 20, 2012 at the same time.

The defendant and the victim are about KRW 30 million, which is about KRW 50 million, as C attorney fee.