On September 20, 2016, the Defendant was sentenced to imprisonment with labor for a violation of the Game Industry Promotion Act in the Gwangju District Court's Netcheon Branch on September 20, 2016, and the judgment became final and conclusive on February 17, 2017.

On March 17, 2016, the Defendant issued a lease amount of KRW 42,650,00, lease period of KRW 48 months, ownership of a leased automobile of KRW 767,571, and KRW 77771,571, and a leased automobile of KRW 386, which is owned by the Victim Company with the Korea Social Services Korea Co., Ltd., Ltd., and the Victim Company, shall not transfer or provide a passenger car to a third party as security, and the lessee shall not transfer or provide a passenger car to a third party without the Victim’s prior consent.

“A lease contract was concluded to the effect that “the said car was delivered by the victim company at that time.”

On May 2016, the Defendant, through D, embezzled the property of the victim company by borrowing KRW 7 million from a seller of a vehicle without his/her name, while keeping a car in accordance with the lease agreement.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of the protocol concerning the interrogation of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement of E;

1. Each statement in a financial application, an agreement on management lease, an automobile registration certificate, and a receipt;

1. Previous conviction: Application of each of the Acts and subordinate statutes described in a reply to inquiry, investigation report (Evidence Records 120 pages);

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

1. The latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code for Handling Concurrent Crimes, but the reason for sentencing in the first sentence of Article 39(1) was that the Defendant committed a crime only for a period of two months after the vehicle was leased.

The scale of damage is large and did not recover from damage.

There are five criminal records (two criminal records) in the defendant.

However, the crime of this case is one of the concurrent crimes of the former and the latter part of Article 37 of the Criminal Code.

The age, occupation, family relationship, and post-crime of the defendant.