1. The Defendant’s judgment based on the Suwon District Court Decision 2016Gahap373, 380 (Joint Judgment) Decided December 22, 2016.

1. Factual basis

A. The Plaintiff’s report 1 on the Defendant’s suspicion of embezzlement is a press organization that issues daily newspaper “C Press” and online newspaper “D Press” (Internet Address E). The Defendant was a person who was in charge of the president of a F organization from February 29, 2012 to February 24, 2015. 2) G organization regularly audited the F organization from October 13, 2014 to October 17, 2014, and used the F organization’s command activity activity without any documentary evidence for 32 months on October 28, 2014, and submitted the audit results to the Defendant’s disciplinary proceedings.

3) On January 19, 2015, the Plaintiff confirmed through coverage that the Defendant was requested to attend a disciplinary procedure on the charge of embezzlement of command activity expenses and public funds and received a request for attendance at the G Organization Disciplinary Committee. On January 19, 2015, the Plaintiff took an article of H’s title on the 22th page of the C media community. On the same day, the Defendant issued an online newspaper with the same article as “I” as “I”. After verifying that the Suwon-Nam Police Station was to summon the Plaintiff on the charge of embezzlement. On February 10, 2015, on the same day, on the 22th page of the C media community, the Defendant took an article of J’s title (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant article”). On the same day, on the same day, the Defendant arbitrarily laid off the article of the same item on the online newspaper with the same title (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the instant article”). The Defendant’s disposition of non-prosecution regarding suspicion and the Defendant’s subsequent request for news reports from June 31, 201 to 315, 2015.

‘' is proved to have been embezzled by the Defendant on the personal basis of the remainder of the suspected charges, excluding the sum of KRW 1,420,920, which the Defendant recognized as having used individually.