The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of punishment shall be suspended against the Defendants.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. From the time when a mistake of facts was taken office in Defendant A’s social welfare foundation B (hereinafter “Defendant Foundation”), the fundamental property was not lost, and the withdrawal of funds deposited in the account held in the name of Defendant Foundation by Defendant A with temporary financing cannot be deemed as a genuine fundamental property, and the alteration of the fundamental property’s use is not a change.

B. The lower court’s sentencing (a fine of two million won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of mistake of facts, Article 23(1) and (2) of the Social Welfare Services Act provides that a social welfare foundation shall own property necessary for the operation of the social welfare business, and that the list and value of its fundamental property shall be stated in the articles of incorporation. In addition, as seen above, Article 23(3) of the same Act provides that a social welfare foundation shall obtain permission from the Mayor/Do governor to sell, donate, exchange, lease, provide security, change of the purpose of its use. This was established to ensure that the social welfare foundation can faithfully carry out its original objective business by smoothly managing and maintaining its property, thereby ensuring the appropriateness of its finance. (2) According to the evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below, the defendant foundation received a corrective order requesting the preservation of the amount of basic property loss from the competent government office on November 1, 201; (3) the fact that the defendant foundation opened a new account on July 30, 2012 after receiving a request for correction order; and (4) the fact that the list of fundamental property was modified on August 14, 201300 billion.