However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On April 201, 201, the Defendant leased the three floors of the victim D and the said C building at the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of the office of

The defendant requested additional funds to the victim from the victim on June 201, but he refused to do so from the victim.

The victim referred to as “the amount of KRW 190 million invested in Korea,” and the victim concluded a lease agreement again with F, a lessor, on June 1, 2015, on the third floor of the above C building, and used KRW 30 million around June 3, 2015 for personal debt repayment, etc. while the victim was issued to a new bank account in the name of G, the wife of each of the Defendant, and kept the victim for the victim after obtaining a lease agreement again with F, the lessor around June 1, 2015.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D, H and I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as purchase/sale table;

1. Relevant Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Determination on the assertion by the defendant and his/her defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. The gist of the claim is that the Defendant received KRW 190 million from the injured party as its partner, and received from the lessor F the refund of KRW 50 million out of the lease deposit of KRW 100 million (hereinafter “the redemption deposit of this case”). However, the above KRW 50 million was used to repay the debt incurred while engaging in his/her business, and it was not arbitrarily consumed under the pretext of his/her personal debt repayment, etc.

2. The decision-making trade property belongs to the partnership of partners, so as long as the partnership exists, the partner will dispose of his/her shares in the trade property at will.