The judgment below

The remainder, excluding the rejection of an application for compensation order, shall be reversed.

The defendant shall be sentenced to six months of imprisonment.

1. The decision of the court below on the gist of the reasons for appeal (the imprisonment of eight months) is too unreasonable.

2. The judgment of this case is that the Defendant, who was the general secretary of the victim’s “C organization”, was embezzled of KRW 32,080,330, which is the full amount of the funds of the said organization that was kept in office by the Defendant, a friendship group, and the issue is not somewhat weak in light of the nature of the crime and the amount of the damage, and the amount of the damage was not repaid, and the said organization appears to have suffered additional damage, such as the actual injury caused by the instant crime, etc., that is disadvantageous to

On the other hand, the defendant seems to have been aware of his mistake and against himself, there is no record of criminal punishment except once a fine is imposed on the crime of double-class crime, and the defendant was accused as the president of the above organization when it was in the first instance.

B, members G of the above organization and H want to take the Defendant’s preference, etc. are favorable to the Defendant.

In full view of the above circumstances and the Defendant’s age, sex, environment, circumstances leading to the commission of the crime, and various sentencing conditions as shown in the records and arguments, the lower court’s punishment is somewhat unreasonable.

3. As such, the defendant's appeal is reasonable, and the part of the judgment below excluding the rejection of an application for compensation order among the court below's decision pursuant to Article 364 (6) of the Criminal Procedure Act is reversed, and it is again decided as follows after pleading.

[Judgment of the court below, excluding the dismissed part of the application for compensation order in the judgment below] Criminal facts and summary of evidence acknowledged by this court and summary of evidence are as stated in the corresponding column of the court below's judgment. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with Article 369 of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Application of Statutes

1. As seen in the relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act, Articles 356 and 355(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts, and the part concerning determination of the Defendant’s wrongful assertion of sentencing prior to the grounds for sentencing of sentence of imprisonment.