The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant did not intend to obtain unlawful profits on the part of the Defendant, in order to exchange the victim’s check with a check issued at a casino, by taking the direction of the victim, and lost money by gambling in a casino; and that the Defendant paid money to the victim who lost money by gambling from E, the Defendant did not intend to obtain unlawful profits.

In addition, since the victim asked the defendant to exchange the check at the casino to conceal criminal proceeds, applying the crime of embezzlement to the defendant is unfair because it is a result of neglecting the concealment of criminal proceeds.

Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the facts or by misapprehending the legal principles, thereby affecting the conclusion of judgment.

2. The intent of unlawful acquisition in the crime of embezzlement of occupational duties refers to the intention to dispose of the property of another person in breach of his/her occupational duty, such as the case of his/her own possession, with the aim of seeking the benefit of himself/herself or a third party, and then return, reimburse or preserve it later;

Even if there is no obstacle to recognizing the intention of illegal acquisition.

(1) On July 24, 2013, the Defendant and E deposited a cashier’s check of KRW 100 million in the “G” account at a foreign exchange bank on the same day. In a case where a customer deposits money in advance to a casino account, the cashier’s check of KRW 100 million in the face value is deposited in the account of “G”. The Defendant and E are exchanged with a cashier’s check of KRW 100,000 through KRW 5,000 in the face value issued by the casino on July 24, 2013, and the Defendant and E are exchanged with a cashier’s check of KRW 1 million in the face value issued by the casino.