However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

The Defendant is a person who is in charge of the F Group Vice-Chairperson from around 2012. The Defendant has overall control over the management of art works held by F, such as the purchase, sale, exhibition, preservation, lease, etc.

1. On February 13, 2014, the Defendant: (a) instructed an affiliate officer to take away the said work from the Defendant’s own choice to the Defendant’s third party; and (b) substituted the maternity on the job while keeping the Victim’s “I” (J) owned by the Victim at H located in Gyeonggi-gu G in the Gyeonggi-si G, Gyeonggi-do; and (c) ordered the affiliate officer to take the work.

As a result, the Defendant embezzled the amount of KRW 250 million at the market price of “I” owned by the Victim (State) F, while maintaining it for business purposes.

2. On May 2015, the Defendant, at the office of the Vice-Chairperson of the F Headquarters in Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, moved the said work to the Defendant’s own home by ordering the employees to cut off the said work while he/she had been in business custody of the victim(N) who is an affiliated company of the F headquarters in Yongsan-gu, Seoul.

As a result, the Defendant embezzled the amount of KRW 174 million per 10,000,000 from the "M" owned by the victim (state).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by each prosecutor onO or P by the prosecution;

1. A contract for the lease of art works, and a list of H household members;

1. Application of the photographic Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 356 of the Criminal Act, Articles 355 (1) and 355 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

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. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Where the sentencing criteria [the scope of the recommended punishment] Class 2 (the amount of not less than KRW 100 million, the amount of less than KRW 500 million) is mitigated (six months to two years) (the amount of special mitigation) or a considerable damage is recovered;

2. Criteria for the suspension of execution [main reasons for the suspension of execution] (main reasons for the suspension of execution) no (affirmative) (affirmative) where damage is recovered from a considerable portion of damage / [general reasons for the suspension of execution] there is no negative reason (affirmative) (affirmative)

3. Determination of sentence: In this case, the defendant, who exercises overall control over the management of art works owned by the enterprise, point two of the above art works;