However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The Defendant entered into a contract with E and the victim F to enter into a subcontract for extraction of aggregate on January 2, 2013 and installed one 400 tons of oil at the market price of the victim owned by the victim at the above aggregate extraction site from December 24, 2012 to November 30, 2013 after obtaining permission for sand extraction from the voice group D from around December 24, 2012.

On June 14, 2013, the Defendant: (a) reversed a subcontract with E and the victim; and (b) concluded a lease contract with the victim for the above nivers machinery; and (c) stored the said machinery at the site of aggregate extraction, the Defendant embezzled the victim’s property by selling the said machinery at his/her own discretion to a person who is in an incurable manner on the part of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the defendant in the first trial record;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. A protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects of E;

1. Statement made by the prosecution against the F;

1. Statement of the police statement related to G;

1. A complaint (including attached documents), a copy of the contract, and the print and copy of the Internet information screen for sales of nitrot on the Internet, and certification of contents;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to each investigation report (including accompanying documents);

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act in relation to the relevant criminal facts and the choice of punishment;

1. Application of the sentencing guidelines [the types of decisions] Embezzlement Embezzlement Embezzlement ] Embezzlement, Type 1 (less than KRW 100 million) [the person subject to special sentencing] mitigation elements: The area of mitigation of punishment (the scope of the determination of the recommended area and the scope of the recommended sentence], the area of mitigation of punishment, and one month to ten months;

2. In light of the fact that the market price of the machine embezzled by the defendant in the decision of sentence is a considerable amount, the criminal liability of the defendant is not minor;

However, in consideration of all the sentencing conditions in the records and arguments of this case, such as the fact that the defendant recognizes the crime as a substitute, and the amount acquired as a result of the actual crime appears to be below the market price, and that the defendant agreed smoothly with the victim, etc., the punishment shall be determined as ordered.