The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 3,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds of appeal reveals that the defendant embezzled money owned by the clans under the name of attorney-at-law in relation to his criminal case as shown in the facts charged, but the court below did not recognize the defendant's intention of embezzlement on the sole basis of some circumstances related to the scarcity or anti-scarcity disadvantage.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant is a person selected by the president of the B (hereinafter “instant clan”) around November 12, 2015, and is a person who has overall control over the affairs of the clan and is engaged in the business of keeping the property of the clan.

On November 12, 2015, the Defendant was investigated by the police station, etc. of the Gwangju Northern Branch on the ground that “the Defendant interfered with the election of executive officers of a clan and stolen documents of a clan” with four members of another clan.

Accordingly, on December 24, 2015, the Defendant embezzled KRW 1 million from among the money owned by the clans in custody for a clan, as transportation expenses of the Defendant, including the Defendant, by arbitrarily using it for the Defendant. From around that time to October 19, 2016, the Defendant embezzled 27,221,00 won in total under the name of attorney appointment fees, advisory fees, transportation expenses, meal expenses, etc. related to the criminal case of the Defendant for a total of 20 times, as shown in the attached Table 1 to 20 times from that time.

B. The lower court’s judgment based on the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence, i.e., (i) the fact of accusation against the Defendant, etc., fundamental issues, such as the legality of the procedures of the board of directors or the general assembly of this case, rather than personal offenses, and (ii) the thief of the facts of accusation, if it is found guilty of the larceny part among the facts of accusation, may have the burden of evidence of documentary evidence submitted in civil litigation.