The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the Defendant was involved in the 2000 won of the subsidies of 15 million won in the second half of the year 2011 and that the 3000 million won was not known at all, in the first half of the year 2011.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which recognized that the defendant embezzled the above subsidy in collusion with A is erroneous by misunderstanding the fact and thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. In full view of the following circumstances duly admitted and examined by the court below, the defendant, as the Secretary-General of the Victim E (hereinafter “the Federation”), who is a victim’s incorporated association, uses subsidies of KRW 15 million from the second half of the year 2011 paid from the Seoul Olympic Sports Promotion Foundation (hereinafter “the instant subsidies”) for the purpose other than the designated purpose as a secretary-general of the victim’s incorporated association, and embezzled such subsidies. A. It can be acknowledged the facts of the crime of the court below’s holding that the defendant embezzleds the subsidies of KRW 15 million from

The Defendant was a standing director who is the Vice-Chairperson of the Federation at the time of applying for the recruitment of subsidies in 2011, and served as the Secretary-General of the Federation from March 24, 201, and the instant subsidies were paid to the Federation’s account on July 15, 201 when four months have elapsed since the Defendant served as the Secretary-General, and was executed from that date to July 29, 201, as shown in the List of Offenses (2) in the holding of the lower judgment.

(b)The Secretary-General shall obtain the approval of the Secretary-General, etc. even after the enforcement is carried out by the person in charge of the executive affairs, in the position of managing the revenues and expenditures of the Federation as an interim approving officer (the defendant also stated that the defendant has managed the receipts and disbursements of the Federation's funds after becoming the Secretary-General

C. K, who applied for the instant subsidy and executed it, stated in the lower court that “only reported the execution of the instant subsidy to A, and the Defendant did not know at all about the deposit and execution of the instant subsidy.”