When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

From April 4, 2016, the Defendant had been working as the victim “E” company operated by D located in Busan Jin-gu, Busan as well as the household affairs belonging to D.

On August 2016, the Defendant did not refund 20,000 won of usage fees received from the customer F of the said company for the victim company, despite the request for the return of the victim company, while the Defendant directly received KRW 350,000 from the customer F of the said company, and was in custody for the victim company. On August 2016, the Defendant did not refund 20,000 won of usage fees received from the customer G by the said method.

Accordingly, the Defendant embezzled the total amount of 50,000 won of cash owned by the victim who was in business custody on a total of two occasions.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness D;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the police officers of the accused;

1. The defendant and his defense counsel's assertion such as evidentiary materials, etc. acknowledged that the defendant directly received a charge of 50,000 won in total from the customers of the victim company. However, at the time of committing the crime of this case, the relationship between the defendant and the victim company was terminated, and even if the relationship was maintained, the defendant was prohibited from receiving the fee directly from the customers under the above contract relationship, and thus, the defendant was in the status of keeping the user fee in business for the victim company.

It can not be seen that the defendant claimed the return of deposit KRW 100,000 to the victim company, and the defendant's fee of KRW 550,000 for the victim company is merely KRW 88,00,00,000. If the above fee is deducted from the deposit, the defendant did not return the money to the company.

embezzlement.