If the defendant does not pay the above fine, the amount of KRW 100,000 shall be paid.

The Defendant is the nominal owner of a corporate bank B Account.

On March 7, 2018, the Defendant embezzled an amount equivalent to the same amount by rejecting a request for return of KRW 2,100,000,000 paid by the victim to a corporate bank B account under the name of the Defendant, while the Defendant received and kept 2,10,000,000,000 from a company bank account under the name of the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a deposit statement, entry, and statement of withdrawal transactions;

1. Relevant Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning criminal facts, the choice of a fine, and the choice of a fine;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. Considering the following circumstances in sentencing grounds under Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act of the provisional payment order, the amount of fine for the summary order already issued cannot sufficiently achieve the purpose of punishment against the defendant.

Therefore, on the basis of Article 457-2 of the Criminal Procedure Act, the fine shall be increased and the sentence shall be determined as ordered.

Although the Defendant had been given an opportunity to agree several times, the Defendant did not assert that the Defendant did not accept from an investigative agency to this court, and did not comply with the agreement.

does not reflect his fault.