If the defendant does not pay the above fine, KRW 100,000.

The Defendant is working as an employee of the F used cars trading company in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government E-building 215, and around July 7, 2014, the Defendant was requested to sell and purchase the G windsle car owned by the victim D with the price of KRW 12,50,000 and received the vehicle from the victim on the condition that it would receive KRW 50,000 as a fee.

The Defendant, at around July 23, 2014, sold the above vehicle that was requested to sell to another place via H, and received the price of KRW 12.4 million and stored for the victim KRW 9.35 million after deducting KRW 3050,000,00,000, such as registration fees and fees, was embezzled without permission by the Defendant’s personal use at the end of the same month.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of a witness I;

1. Recording notes of the examination of a witness D;

1. Second prosecutor's protocol of interrogation of the accused (including D's statement);

1. Determination as to the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel

1. The Defendant is not obligated to pay the sales proceeds of the windsle vehicle that is entrusted with sale by the victim (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) to the victim, but is obligated to purchase another vehicle equivalent to the amount and deliver it to the victim.

Therefore, since the right to dispose of the sales price of the vehicle of this case is the defendant, the defendant arbitrarily used it.

Even if embezzlement is not established, embezzlement is not established.

Even if not, the Defendant did not have any intention to acquire unlawful profits for the Defendant, since the Defendant was kept as the intent to pay a certain amount of money from the sales of the instant vehicle to the victim at any time.

I would like to say.

2. Determination

A. The money that a person delegated to handle affairs with the receipt and receipt of money received from a third party for the delegating person based on such act is a special case, unlike the money that has been entrusted for the purpose or use only.