The judgment of the court below is reversed.

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

However, the above punishment shall be imposed for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. (1) Inmisunderstanding of facts, I is entitled to receive retirement allowances from H Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim”).

Furthermore, the Defendant merely received 30,000,000 won from I, and there was no fact that he embezzled the money of the victimized company.

(2) Of the details of the use of the corporate card in attached Form 14 through 17, 19, 27, 28, 31, 32, 41, 42, 44, 46, 49, 68, 78, 110, and 114, the remainder, excluding No. 14, 31, 32, 32, 41, 42, 46, 49, 68

B. The lower court’s sentence of unreasonable sentencing is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. (1) On March 16, 2011, the summary of the facts charged is as follows: (a) an excessive withdrawal of the amount of the victimized company under the name of I’s retirement allowance; and (b) a transfer of part of the amount from the new bank account of the victimized company to I under the name of retirement allowance from the new bank account of the victimized company with intent to use at will; and (c) a transfer of KRW 30,000,000 among them to the Defendant’s national bank account.

(2) The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court below and the court below.

(A) The circumstances leading up to the establishment of the victimized company and the status of the parties 1) The victimized company has been engaged in the business of leasing a logistics warehouse building located in Echeon-si G, 200 for the purpose of “logistics industry and logistics warehouse leasing business, real estate leasing business, etc.” (2) The Defendant and F jointly incorporated the victimized company by investing KRW 500,000,000 in each of the 100,000 shares issued by the victimized company, and each of 50,000 shares in each of the 10,000 shares issued by the victimized company was owned directly or in the name of their family members (in the case of the Defendant, the Defendant is the wife, the name of E, the name of K, and the name of F, etc.). The decision-making of the victimized company was practically made by the Defendant and F.

3 The defendant shall be I and joint representative directors from June 22, 2009 to February 22, 201, from February 23, 2011 to March 5, 201, from February 23, 201 to March 5, 201, respectively.