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.

The defendant, as the representative director of the victim D corporation located in Busan-gun C, was engaged in the management of the company's funds while controlling the company's business.

around August 29, 2014, the Defendant was in custody of the Defendant in the course of his/her business in the office of the above D Co., Ltd., and in order to repay the debt to the E Co., Ltd., another company run by the Defendant.

D 5 Hd Section 1, the market price of which is equivalent to KRW 81,818,180, and KRW 27,272,730, the market price of which is equivalent to KRW 27,272,730, and KRW 15,235,510, the market price of which is equivalent to KRW 124,326,420, which is the total market price of KRW 124,326,420, and three studs of the above Section (hereinafter referred to as “the instant machinery”) were embezzled by arbitrarily transferring three studs of the instant machinery (hereinafter referred to as “the instant machinery”).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police with respect to F;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to replys to the details of purchase and sale contracts, requests for production and reports on completion of products, investigation reports (to hear statements by complainants) regarding the details of purchase and factual inquiries about the preparation of the further Esex;

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of criminal facts;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following sentencing shall be taken into consideration in favor of the people in mind):

1. The crime of this case on the grounds of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is an unfavorable circumstance, where the instant machinery was transferred to others and embezzled, and the crime is not deemed to be a good crime, and the amount of damage is not much.

However, it seems that the defendant's recognition of the facts charged is seriously against the defendant, there is no record of criminal punishment except for three different kinds of fines, and the actual amount of damage seems to be merely an amount of KRW 80 million less than the facts charged, the victim D and E are both companies operated by the defendant, and the defendant is the victim D companies.