The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The scope of the judgment of this court is that the court below rendered a not guilty verdict on the part of the facts charged in this case as stated in the judgment of the court below 7-8, and it found the remainder of the occupational breach of trust which is related to the crime in this case to be guilty, the court below did not render a separate judgment of

The defendant appealed only on the ground of mistake of facts and unreasonable sentencing, and the prosecutor did not separately appeal on the acquittal part of the reason. However, the acquittal part of the reason was also judged in the trial together with the guilty part, but the acquittal part of the reason was already relieved from the object of attack and defense between the parties.

Therefore, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the remainder except the acquittal part of the judgment of the court below, and the judgment of the court below on the acquittal part of the reasoning of the court below is not separately determined by the court below.

Summary of Grounds for Appeal

A. In relation to the mistake of facts and misapprehension of the legal principle-based occupational embezzlement, the defendant, elected by the chairperson of the promotion committee, received expenses incurred when holding a meeting with some members who are interested in the promotion committee's business in order to hear various opinions related to the progress of the business. Thus, this is a cost disbursement related to the duties of the promotion committee, and therefore, the defendant cannot be deemed to have the intention of embezzlement or unlawful acquisition.

In relation to bonus-related occupational embezzlement, Article 25 of the Victim's Remuneration Management Regulations provides that the defendant, who is the chairperson of the promotion committee, may be paid bonuses by the decision of the victim, and in fact, 100% bonus has been paid to full-time employees once a year, so the defendant, who is the chairperson of the full-time promotion committee, may also be paid the bonus, and thus, the defendant can be paid the bonus.