A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.

However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

From October 2012 to April 2017, the Defendant has worked as the head of the Administrative Support Team at the F General Social Welfare Center E, an institution affiliated with the victim welfare foundation E, which is located in Ansan-si Group E, Ansan-si, and has been engaged in the management of the funds of the above welfare center.

On January 31, 2013, the Defendant deposited the operating fund of the welfare center in the National Bank account (Account Number G) in the name of the F General Social Welfare Center in the name of the F General Social Welfare Center and transferred one million won to the foreign exchange bank account (Account Number:H) in the name of the Defendant and used it for the purpose of paying for the credit card of the Defendant.

In addition, from around that time to February 28, 2017, the Defendant consumed a total of KRW 599,224,031 by the same method over 211 times, such as the list of crimes in the attached list of crimes.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made to I by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on account transactions;

1. Relevant Article 356 of the Criminal Act, Articles 355 (1) and 355 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act / [Scope of the recommended sentence] Class 3 (50 million won to be less than five billion won) (one year to six years) mitigation area (one year to three years), / a person with a special mitigation] punishment, or a case where significant damage has been restored (the decision of sentence] crime of this case is long for the pertinent period, and the amount of embezzlement is large.

However, the defendant continued to commit the crime by transferring money from the victim's account to his account by using it again, and transferring money from his account to the victim's account. It is smaller that the victim's property damage or the profit actually acquired by the defendant is compared to the amount of the embezzlement of this case, most of the damage is deemed to have been recovered, and the defendant seems to be in conflict with the depth of the victim, and the age, occupation, and sex of the defendant is other.