2.Provided, That the foregoing shall not apply for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On January 6, 2012, the Defendant was sentenced to 10 months of imprisonment with prison labor and 2 years of suspended execution due to the charge of forging private documents at the Seoul Western District Court on January 6, 2012, and the judgment became final and conclusive on January 14, 2012, and on September 5, 2012, the Seoul Western District Court sentenced 10 months of imprisonment with prison labor and 2 years of suspended execution, and the judgment became final and conclusive on September 13, 2012.

The Defendant is a person who actually operates C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “C”).

On August 5, 2009, the Defendant borrowed KRW 400 million in the name of the victim C at the personnel Dong branch of Han Bank in Jongno-gu Seoul Jongno-gu, Jongno-gu, 151-8. On August 11, 2009, the Defendant borrowed KRW 200 million in the name of the victim C in the name of the victim C and kept it for business purposes. At around that time, the Defendant arbitrarily delivered KRW 600 million to D in the name of the purchase of shares from D.

Accordingly, the Defendant embezzled KRW 600 million owned by the victim C.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each statement of witness E and F;

1. Each police interrogation protocol of the accused, D, E, or F;

1. Defense counsel's written opinion;

1. Before judgment: Application of criminal records and investigation reports (verification of the fixed date of judgment) and statutes;

1. Relevant Article on the crime and Article 3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act for the selection of punishment;

1. The latter part of Article 37 and Article 39 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning concurrent crimes;

1. Determination as to the assertion of the defendant and his defense counsel under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the grounds for sentencing below)

1. The summary of the assertion is that the Defendant, around August 2009, acquired C’s shares from D and paid KRW 600 million loaned under C’s name to D as the price for acquiring shares. However, since D’s property is offered as security for the existing obligation of C, it is offered as security by D and thus, it is secured by its real estate and E’s property upon request for replacement from D.