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

On July 23, 2013, the Defendant acquired all shares in C (34%) from C on July 23, 2013, the victim D (33%) and the victim E (33%) in the name of H, the Defendant’s wife, and changed the commercial building lease agreement to Schlage that was concluded in the name of C, and thereafter operated the victims and Schlage as a partnership business from that time.

On February 11, 2014, sale was made to third parties.

On February 11, 2014, at the entrance of the Fststst G store in Daegu Northern-gu I, the Defendant: (a) received KRW 130 million from the lessorJ and kept for the victims the commercial building lease deposit in the name of the Defendant due to the sale of Schlage; (b) requested the victims to return KRW 42.9 million amounting to 33% of their respective shares; (c) however, the Defendant rejected the request and embezzled KRW 85.8 million amount.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness D, E, and C;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a certificate, a transfer and takeover contract, and a joint business contract;

1. The defendant's assertion on the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Code of the relevant criminal facts argues that since the defendant accepted C's share in the partnership business, and the defendant made an oral agreement to preferentially pay the purchase price with the lease deposit, while changing the name of the lessee of Schlage's building into H, the wife, and then, he did not have any obligation to return the lease deposit

The following circumstances revealed by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this Court, and there was no agreement that C, D, and E engaged in the business of operating Schlage, but C, while C, in the name of the lessee of the Schlage's building, was to preferentially refund the investment amount due to the lease deposit return claim. (2) The defendant entered into a contract with C while acquiring C's shares and maintaining C's shares, and whether the acquisition price is guaranteed is a contract.