The defendant operated the "C" in Suwon-si B, Suwon-si, and has been entrusted with the sale of mobile phones from the victim D, and has been engaged in the business of opening the cell phone to customers.

1. On December 26, 2012, the Defendant borrowed KRW 1,750,000 from the pawning area in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and provided at will 5,00,000, the total market price of the victim’s ownership, which was entrusted for sale by the victim and kept for business purposes, as security, KRW 23,00,000,000, and KRW 32,000.

2. Around 19:00 on December 27, 2012, the Defendant borrowed KRW 3,00,000,000 from the Fgalan as above, and provided at will 10,000,000, the total market value of the victim’s possession, which was entrusted for sale by the victim and kept in custody for business purposes, with 2 gallonos 32, options machinegs, 32, VietnamR 32, options machine interview 2, gallons and 21 gallons as security.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Examination protocol of the suspect of G by the prosecution;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of the pawned Agreement;

1. Relevant Article 356 of the Criminal Act, Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment for a crime;

1. From among concurrent crimes, there is no basic area ( April to one year and four months), the reason [the scope of recommendations] for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act (the scope of recommendations] (the scope of less than 100 million won) (the decision of sentence] (the decision of sentence] (the imprisonment for 10 months);