except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On January 11, 2013, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Fraud) in Seoul High Court on January 11, 2013, and the above judgment became final and conclusive on March 28,

On November 5, 2009, the Defendant entered into a facility leasing agreement with the victim Aju Capital Co., Ltd. in the name of his/her spouse D, and immediately received a vehicle owned by the said victim from the F and embezzled the property of the victim by borrowing KRW 13.5 million from the F on May 2010, while the Defendant used the said vehicle as a collateral and embezzled the property of the victim by delivering the said vehicle to the said security.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning suspect examination of D;

1. Protocol of the police statement concerning G;

1. A complaint (including attached documents);

1. Previouss before and after judgments: Criminal records, references to criminal records, reports on the results of confirmation of the previous dispositions, and the application of statutes (Seoul High Court Decision 2012No2677);

1. Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 355 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act dealing with concurrent crimes;

1. Although the reason for the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the circumstances favorable to the defendant among the reasons for sentencing) is not good in light of the methods and contents of the instant crime, the sentence is to be imposed as ordered by taking full account of the following various circumstances, including the following: (a) the confession and reflect of the defendant; (b) the repayment of damage amounting to KRW 17 million after September 2014; (c) the previous conviction and the instant crime are in a concurrent relationship under the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act; and (d) the Defendant’s age, character and conduct and environment; (b) the developments and motive leading to the instant crime; and (c) the circumstances before and after the instant crime.