Defendants shall be punished by a fine of KRW 500,000.

In the event that the Defendants did not pay the above fine, the Defendants did not pay the fine.

Punishment of the crime

Defendant

A is the secretary general of the Council of Victims D (hereinafter referred to as the "victim Corporation") in the former North-U.S. armed forces C, and the defendant B is the head of the operating team of the said association, who is engaged in the management of the proceeds of festivals of the damaged corporation.

E Proceeds is used in relation to the operation and festival of the above incorporated association, but the Defendants, around January 4, 2019, sent 3.20,000 won as revenue of the victimized corporation after drinking the gran tavern in G danF located in the former North Jeju-gun F, and consumed it for personal purposes.

Accordingly, the Defendants conspired and embezzled the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Some police interrogation protocol against the Defendants

1. Each police statement made to H, I, and J;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (in relation to the status of custodian), investigation reports (in addition to data submitted from D), investigation reports (in the course of business of Gran tavern), investigation reports (in the case of

1. The Defendants: Articles 356, 355(1), and 30 of the Criminal Act; the Defendants’ choice of a fine [the Defendants asserted that, although they made a promise to make a meeting with employees of victimized corporations and non-military administration officials, they did not have the intent to commit the crime as they had been drinking and drinking in advance by the Defendants on the wind that all other employees and public officials come home, they did not have the intent to commit the crime. However, according to each evidence stated in the above “the summary of the evidence”, the Defendants were deemed to have embezzled by using the fest festival income of victimized corporations for the purpose that they cannot be used individually, and the Defendants embezzled by the witness K’s legal statement. In other words, there is a conflict of opinion between the employees of victimized corporations and 10 public officials of the Non-military Administration, including the Defendants, and even if all other public officials except the Defendants did not have the above 3.20,000 won drinking and drinking in the above franchisium.]