The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

1. The gist of the grounds for appeal in this case is that F and K operated the “E Hospital” as stated in the facts charged in the instant case. The Defendant merely was an employee of the E Hospital and did not have the status of keeping the victim’s national health insurance premiums, and there was no intention or intent of unlawful acquisition of the crime of occupational embezzlement.

2. Determination

A. The lower court found the Defendant guilty of the instant facts charged by comprehensively taking account of the evidence in its judgment.

B. The following circumstances acknowledged by evidence duly adopted and examined by the court below and the court below. ① The victim stated to the effect that “F is merely the representative of the E Hospital, and the actual operator is the defendant.” Even according to the record, even if the victim was not the victim, it is impossible to find any special circumstances to harm the defendant by designating the defendant as the operator of the E Hospital. ② The defendant stated that F is the operator of the E Hospital and the prosecutor’s office, and the defendant stated that F was the operator of the E Hospital, and that F and K jointly operated the E Hospital until it reached the court below, it seems to be low credibility of the statement. ③ The "Agreement on the Establishment and Operation of the E Hospital" of the F and K on July 1, 201 stated that K was responsible for all investment costs and operating expenses, and it appears that “The amount of KRW 300 million was invested in the first half of the E Hospital, and the remaining amount of money transferred from the K Hospital to 100,000 won to 310,000 won was deposited in the account.”