The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

1. Summary of grounds for appeal;

A. The defendant of mistake of facts is time out of 10 years or more, and the fact that the articles written in the facts charged are left out of the elderly community center, and the fact that the outside of the elderly community center was left out of the center without compensation, and the defendant did not have the purpose of seeking the benefit of himself or a third party, and therefore there was no intention to commit embezzlement, the judgment of the court below convicting the defendant of the facts charged of this case, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, is erroneous.

B. The sentence imposed by the court below on the grounds of unreasonable sentencing (the fine of 400,000 won) is too unreasonable.

2. Determination

A. 1) The intent of unlawful acquisition in the crime of embezzlement refers to an intention to dispose of the property of another person in violation of his/her duty for the purpose of pursuing the benefit of himself/herself or a third party, such as in the case of his/her own possession, and even if he/she wishes to return, reimburse, or preserve it later, it does not interfere with the recognition of the intention of unlawful acquisition (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Do3045, Aug. 19, 2005; 2005Do741, Apr. 29, 2005; 82Do75, Sept. 13, 1983; 2). Meanwhile, if the custodian disposes of the property of another person for the benefit of his/her own or a third party, it cannot be acknowledged that the senior citizen had been lawfully designated by the court below, unless there are any special circumstances, to the contrary.