The defendant is an employee of the victim D Co., Ltd. who is a computer peripheral device and a distribution company that imports computer expendable goods in Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 204, the second floor of Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building C, who performs the duties, such as computer parts.

On June 27, 2013, the Defendant embezzled by arbitrarily disposing of and embezzle 600,000 won in total at the market price of 3,720,000 won in the name of the victim at the above office of the victimized party, and embezzle 508) around that time, and embezzling at his/her own discretion during his/her business storage. From June 27, 2013 to February 17, 2014, the Defendant embezzled by arbitrarily disposing of computer-related devices and parts worth 87,46,640 won in total at 15 times in total, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Each statement protocol of E prepared by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to data on sales details, a detailed statement of entry and withdrawal transactions, each statement of transactions, electronic tax invoices, books of account, sales details, and current status of inventory;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Articles 356 and 355(1) of the Criminal Act (the scope of recommending punishment) [the scope of punishment] Article 356 and Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act (the choice of imprisonment with labor) [the scope of recommending] Article 1 of the basic area [the person who is subject to special sentencing] [the sentence] [the defendant shall be sentenced] for 10 months (the crime in this case shall be committed by the defendant as his employee in the course of performing duties such as the storage and sale of computer parts, etc. from June 27, 2013 to February 17, 2014, considering that the defendant embezzled computer-related devices and parts equivalent to the total market price of 87,46,640 won from February 27, 2013 to the embezzlement of those parts, and that the degree of the crime is not good, and that it has not been agreed with or has not been recovered properly, it is inevitable to sentence the defendant against the defendant.

However, considering the fact that the defendant's mistake and reflects the defendant's mistake, there is no previous conviction, and the fact that the person with a disability of class 4 is a person with a disability, the defendant's age, sex and environment, and relationship with the victim.