The judgment of the court below is reversed.

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

However, for three years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the grounds for appeal (one year and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

2. Even if an ex officio act of occupational embezzlement is a single legal interest, the form of a crime is identical, and it is recognized that it is a series of acts resulting from the realization of a single criminal intent, it is reasonable to view that it is a single crime as a single crime.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2013Do4737 Decided June 13, 2013 (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do4737, Jun. 13, 2013). In light of the foregoing legal doctrine, each of the instant occupational embezzlement is a single legal interest of the victim as a stock company D (hereinafter “victim”). The Defendant’s withdrawal of corporate funds as a substantial representative of the victim corporation and used for personal purposes, and the form of the crime is the same as the type of crime, and it is reasonable to deem that the overall perception of a single criminal intent is attributable to the realization of a single

Nevertheless, the court below decided that the punishment of each of the charges of occupational embezzlement of this case was changed by applying the rate as substantive concurrent crimes. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the number of comprehensive crimes and concurrent crimes, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and thus, the judgment of the court below cannot be maintained as it is.

3. Accordingly, the judgment of the court below is reversed in accordance with Article 364 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Act without examining the defendant's assertion of unfair sentencing, and the judgment below is again decided as follows after oral argument.

【Grounds for the Judgment of the Supreme Court which has been written] The facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence recognized by the court are identical to the facts constituting an offense and summary of evidence, and thus, the gist of evidence is identical to the facts in each corresponding column of the judgment of the court below.

Application of Statutes

1. To punish, by universal title, Article 356 and Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the relevant criminal facts and the choice of punishment;