The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for three years.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal (e.g., imprisonment with prison labor) imposed by the lower court is too unreasonable.

2. Determination is that the Defendant committed the instant crime for a period of not less than five years from January 26, 2007 to May 18, 2012 while working as an employee in charge of the receipt and disbursement of money of the victim E-cooperative, and the amount of embezzlement therefrom exceeds 765,836,723 won, and that the Defendant committed the instant crime by using a long trust of the deposit holders in a small-scale cooperative based on community, and that considerable part of the amount of damage has not yet been recovered, etc. are disadvantageous to the Defendant.

On the other hand, if the Defendant’s claim for the repayment of principal and interest of the deposit principal with respect to the regular deposit withdrawn or embezzled after early termination at will, then the amount of embezzlement has increased rapidly due to the so-called “concepting” such as voluntarily terminating another customer’s regular deposit and withdrawing the deposit. Accordingly, among the entire amount of embezzlement of this case, the Defendant asserts that the amount paid to the deposit owner according to the aforementioned return method is included in the amount paid to the deposit owner, and that the amount used in the form of return to pay the principal, interest, dividends, etc. to the union members is KRW 291,568,79. However, the Defendant stated that the victim’s complainant’s representative is presumed to be presumed to have been presumed to have been at least KRW

(Evidence 840 pages). (Evidence 840 pages) The fact that part of the amount of damage has been repaid after the instant complaint was filed by the Defendant’s husband, the Defendant’s husband, and the amount of KRW 40 million paid on or around May 2012 by SGI Seoul Guarantee, the amount of KRW 20 million paid on or around February 2013 as credit guarantee insurance money, the Defendant’s retirement pay of KRW 4392,60,000, the Defendant’s subordinated claim held by the Defendant, and the lower court’s sentencing investigation report, are as follows: (a) according to the lower court’s sentencing investigation report, the amount of KRW 40 million paid by I was already arranged at the initial date of the complaint and was not included in the total amount of embezzlement on the daily table prepared on July 2012.