On February 7, 2017, the defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with prison labor for not less than eight months for fraud in the support of Suwon Fagwon in Suwon Fagwon

6. 7. A final and conclusive judgment, and during the period from May 2015 to November 30, 2016, he/she was in charge of the sales and the collection business in the Silang-si Dispute Settlement Co., Ltd.

From October 2015 to October 2016, the Defendant: (a) collected the amount of supplied goods of KRW 2,894,600 from the Fussa City, the customer of the transaction during the period from around October 2015 to around October 2016; and (b) embezzled the amount of supplied goods of KRW 9,371,820 from the transaction partner 7, such as the list of crimes in the attached Form; and (c) arbitrarily used the amount of supplied goods of KRW 9,371,820 from the transaction partner 7, such

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. A complaint, evidentiary materials, and sales ledger related to customers;

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of a reply to inquiries about criminal history data, and application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (report on the binding of judgment);

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

1. Subsequent to Article 37 of the Criminal Act dealing with concurrent crimes: Provided, That the proviso to Article 39 (1) shall apply;

1. Article 37 (former part of Article 37, Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act for the reason of sentencing is a single concurrent crime after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and the sentencing criteria are not applicable.

The victim's damage has not been recovered, the agreement has not yet reached, the defendant is against the confession of the crime of this case, the defendant has no record of punishment for the same criminal record, and the crime of this case is in the concurrent relationship between the crime for which judgment has become final and the crime of this case after Article 37 of the Criminal Act, such as the first head of the crime, and the crime of this case must be considered at the same time as the crime of this case has been tried, and other considerations have been taken into account: