On August 13, 2012, the Defendant received transfer of KRW 100 million to the bank account in the name of G, the representative attorney of the law firm Do, Seocho-gu, Seoul, by stating, “When the Defendant first deposits KRW 100 million in order to purchase a forest located in the city of human use, he/she shall keep the forest in custody, and when the contract for the sale and purchase of the forest is not formed or the return is requested, he/she shall immediately return it.”

The Defendant, while keeping the above KRW 100 million for the victim, voluntarily delivered KRW 50 million to H around that time, and embezzled it.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statement to E;

1. The relevant legal provisions on criminal facts and the reason for sentencing of Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act [Determination of Imprisonment] 100 million won [Determination of the recommended field] The basic area / [Scope of recommendation] April to April 1 year / [where the punishment is not an occupational embezzlement or breach of trust, the scope of punishment] - Where the crime of embezzlement of aggravated factors is an aggravated element [Scope of punishment] applicable provisions: the statutory punishment of Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act: one to five years [Determination of Sentence] did not agree with the victim, and since there was no effort to recover damage, the sentence of punishment against the defendant is judged inevitable, and the sentence of punishment is sentenced in accordance with the sentencing guidelines as ordered.

However, the victim received 37.510,000 won from D, and it is judged that it is reasonable to give the defendant an additional opportunity to agree with the victim, so the defendant is not bound by law.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.