On May 26, 2014, the Defendant entered into a car lease agreement with the victim Da Office located in Seocho-gu Seoul, with respect to the Domination of the amount of KRW 84 million in the market price, and paid a deposit of KRW 16.8 million, and received a delivery of XF car around the 30th day of the same month.

On June 12, 2014, when the Defendant kept the above re-f car in XF for the victim, the Defendant received 28 million won and sold the purchase price to the person who was dissatisf in the name of the victim at a nonsatisf place.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. Application of the automobile lease agreement, the automobile registration ledger, the calculation details of the termination of the vehicle even, the payment details, and the Acts and subordinate statutes related to the termination of the lease agreement;

1. The reason for sentencing (the scope of recommending punishment) under Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts and Article 355(1) of the choice of punishment [the scope of recommending punishment] (the period between April and January 100) in the basic area (the period between April and April 4), there is no special sentencing person] [the decision of sentencing] [the defendant is against the defendant in six months], and recognized a crime in six months, and the fact that the defendant has no special criminal records other than the one-time fine prior to the first-time fine, etc.

However, in light of the fact that the degree of damage caused by the Defendant’s crime of this case is not less and that the Defendant agreed with the victim or failed to recover damage, it is inevitable to sentence the Defendant to a sentence.

Therefore, the above punishment shall be determined.