A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for a term of one year and two months.

Punishment of the crime

A victim-based forestry cooperative in 2016 (1258) entered into a contract with the owner of the forest and forest who needs felling, fells timber of the forest and disposes of it in a disciplinary action, an original wood company, etc., and then runs a business to settle the profits from the forest and the owner of the forest and to settle the profits from the sale of timber.

The Defendant is a person who, from January 4, 2016 to February 29, 2016, was in charge of performing the duties of disposing of timber acquired by cutting it out in the above forest and field as a result of the commission of a site manager in C forest and field felling projects, D in inn and inn city, and E inn city, from January 4, 2016.

On January 6, 2016, the Defendant disposed of timber cut from a forest forest subject to the victim’s felling business to F, and deposited the amount of KRW 3 million in the Agricultural Cooperatives deposit account in the name of the Defendant, and around that time, embezzled total of KRW 44,367,650, as shown in the List of Crimes, from around July 4, 2016 to around July 4, 2016.

Around September 10, 2013, the defendant of "2016 Highest 1586" filed an application for a hump permission with the victim H at the defendant's house located in Sju City, G about September 10, 2013, "The permission will be the date of permission."

If the advance payment of the cost of the raw tree is made in order to lack working expenses such as personnel expenses and the head of the farm, it is intended to cut the raw tree and supply the tree as permitted by the tree.

The phrase “ makes a false statement.”

However, the Defendant did not have the intent or ability to obtain the permit of felling all at five places in the I Triju City, and even if the Defendant obtained the permit of felling in some forest, it was thought that he would sell the original tree produced in the forest in another place and repay his personal obligation with the proceeds from the sale thereof, and there was no intention or ability to supply the original tree produced as above to the victim, and there was no property otherwise, and thus, the victim is the original tree.