The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The money that the Defendant misunderstanding the facts and misapprehension of the legal doctrine received is not an apartment subsidy, but an apartment subsidy, but an administrative cost created at the discretion of the managing director, and thus does not constitute another’s

The defendant only transferred the money created for management expenses to the exclusive account for management expenses and used it for public purposes, and there is no personal misappropriation or embezzlement.

B. Sentencing

2. Determination

A. As to the assertion of misunderstanding of facts and legal principles, the intent to acquire illegal property in the crime of embezzlement on duty refers to the intention to dispose of another person's property in actual or legal manner, such as his/her own property, for the purpose of seeking his/her own interest or a third party's interest, and there is an intention to return, compensate, and preserve it later.

Even if there is no obstacle to recognizing the intention of illegal acquisition.

In full view of the circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and examined, namely, ① the Defendant’s subsidy received from apartment-related companies for apartment residents, not the head of apartment management affairs office, is ordinarily considered as the apartment complex development fund and is normally managed as miscellaneous income; ② the Defendant was able to receive the said subsidy from the account under the name of the Sejong Comprehensive Management, which is the apartment management entity at the time, but the Defendant was paid the said money in his/her name; ③ the Defendant was arbitrarily used after receiving the said money; and ③ the Defendant was sufficiently admitted that he/she embezzled the said money as stated in the facts constituting the crime; and that the Defendant’s return part of the money received by the Defendant or the payment of the tax integrated management was merely the refund of the embezzlement money or the repayment of the damage.

According to Article 59 of the Multi-Family Housing Management Rules, miscellaneous income shall be treated as the same manner as the management expenses and other accounts.