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

From February 2, 2015 to June 2017, the Defendant worked as the head of the sales division in the E agency of the Haban-gun C Victim D’s operation of the Haban-gun, and was engaged in drinking water sales and water collection business.

On February 2, 2015, the Defendant collected KRW 7,168,400 from H Mart in G operation in Kimhae-si F and stored for the victim. Around that time, the Defendant used KRW 6,641,400 for personal purposes, such as entertainment expenses, in mind.

In addition, from around that time to June 2017, the Defendant spent 61,869,558 won in total for the total amount of 49 times in Changwon-si, etc., as indicated in the list of crimes in the attached Form.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the property of the victim while on duty.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of statutes governing confirmations of balance submitted by complainants and electronic transaction ledger of companies;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act (generally, selection of imprisonment with prison labor);

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Social Service Order Criminal Act include: (a) the Defendant’s mistake is deeply divided and reflected in his depth; (b) there are some circumstances to consider the motive and background leading to the instant crime; (c) there are no other criminal records except that the Defendant was fined twice; and (d) the Defendant deposited KRW 20,000 against the victim, which is favorable to the Defendant.

On the other hand, the fact that the amount of damage caused by the crime of this case is not much, and the damage has not been completely restored until now is disadvantageous to the defendant.

In addition, the means and results of the instant crime, various records and arguments, such as circumstances after the instant crime, age, sexual conduct, intelligence, environment, etc., are shown.