Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

If the defendant does not pay the above fine, 50,000 won shall be one day.

Punishment of the crime

1. On September 4, 2013, the Defendant, in collusion with C, embezzled the amount of KRW 20,80,000, market price of one of the keys (10,000,000 won) in the F located in Guro-gu Seoul, Guro-gu, Seoul, while keeping the funds, etc. of the Senior Citizens Association from the members of the Korea Senior Citizens Association Dros Association for the purpose of business in the accounts, etc. of the Saemaul Treasury.

As a result, the defendant embezzled public funds in collusion with C.

2. From March 2009 to September 4, 2013, the Defendant, while working as the chairperson of the above D branch, deposited 11,000,000 won of the public funds for senior citizens’ clubs and the money regularly provided at the Guro-gu Office into the accounts of community credit cooperatives, etc., and embezzled KRW 11,030,550,00 in total, as shown in the attached Table of Crimes (except No. 72) from March 2009, the Defendant voluntarily consumed and embezzled KRW 11,030,050,000 in total, from March 2009 to September 4, 2013.

Summary of Evidence

1. Examination protocol of the accused by prosecution;

1. Each legal statement of witness G, C and H;

1. Each prosecutor's interrogation protocol concerning C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (the attachment of the copy of the account books per DNA route and the record of extraordinary general meetings per DNA route);

1. Article 356 of the Criminal Act and Articles 356, 355 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act, the choice of fines for the crime;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Part concerning the dismissal of prosecution under Article 334 (1) of the Criminal Procedure Act;

1. The summary of the facts charged was embezzled KRW 2,080,000 as indicated in the separate crime list No. 72, Sept. 4, 2013, using the same method as indicated in paragraph (2) of the facts charged in the judgment.

2. Since this part of the facts charged overlaps with paragraph 1 of the facts charged as indicated in the judgment, it is necessary to dismiss a public prosecution pursuant to Article 327 subparagraph 3 of the Criminal Procedure Act because it falls under the case in which a public prosecution is instituted again. However, it is the facts charged in relation to the general crime.