And I subscribe to subjective morality. Stealing and embezzlement are not objectively wrong any more than they are objectively right. It's a case-by-case basis, so you are not inherently a "better person" compared to the next guy who would embezzle 10 grand just because you choose not to.
Really? That's what this is all about?, I call shenanigans, technically embezzlement doesn't judge a person, but in this case they risked hundreds of jobs for a crappy game making them, if not bad a very stupid person. About 98% of embezzlers are bad people on a case by case basis(from madeupstatistics.com) meaning that assuming that an embezzler is a bad person, while not always right is often right. Not all murderers are bad people but it is better to presume bas (if proven guilty) until proven good. If you look at other non subjective moral factors most embezzlers are bad, enough to make an assumption for arguments sake. Subscribing to a subjective morality doesn't make it any less illegal so in a court case by case basis they are going to jail or getting fined %100 of the time so I don't mind how subjective your morality is
and I wasn't actually serious hence the banana.