However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

When the Defendant came to know of the fact that the Defendant continued to use the Defendant’s bank account in the name of the Defendant and deposited money in the account in order to manage the profits of “D”, which the Defendant had been used by the Defendant from around February 2011 to February 2013, the Defendant thought that he was to withdraw part of the amount from the said account and use it as living expenses, etc.

1. On March 23, 2015, the Defendant: (a) withdrawn KRW 120 million out of the amount deposited by the victim C in the bank account (E) in the name of the Defendant at a location in the territory of the Republic of Korea located in the territory of Gangnam-gu, Seoul; and (b) used the money arbitrarily used by the Defendant at the “F” main point managed by the Defendant, thereby consuming it for personal use.

2. On August 3, 2015, the Defendant withdrawn KRW 7 million out of the amount deposited by the victim C in cash at a location in the territory of the Republic of Korea bank located in the territory of Gangnam-gu, Seoul, and consumed it for personal purposes, such as living expenses.

Accordingly, the Defendant embezzled the property in custody.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the defendant in the fifth public trial records;

1. Statement made by C by the witness in the fourth public trial protocol;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the suspect against the defendant (including a substitute part of examination);

1. Each police statement protocol with respect to G and C;

1. Complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the investigation report (related to the execution and reply of a warrant of seizure 2017-17141), Korean bank correspondence, investigation report (related to the execution and reply of a warrant of seizure 2017-18086), investigation report (related to the arrangement of details of check use), arrangement of check details, confirmation, and payment, respectively;

1. Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. The former part of Article 37 of the Criminal Act, and Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the same Act, which aggravated concurrent crimes;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act [the scope of recommended punishment] Type 2 (not less than 100 million won but less than 500 million won) is mitigated (6 months to 2 years).