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.

From July 28, 2015, the Defendant engaged in mobile phone management, sales, and collection at the “F” mobile phone sales store of the victim E in Daejeon Dong-gu, Daejeon.

On August 6, 2015, at around 21:00, the Defendant embezzled the amount equivalent to KRW 19,686,90 at the 26 mobile phone price indicated in the attached Table of Crimes, which was owned by the victim and kept in custody for the victim on duty at the above “F” mobile phone sales store.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of the defendant in part in the first trial record;

1. Second police statements made to E:

1. The inventory list of the mobile phone damage cell phone (the defendant and his defense counsel asserted that the defendant's 20 cell phone of the mobile phone sent by the victim cannot be recognized as illegal acquisition intention, but it is reasonable to view that the defendant's intent of illegal acquisition of the whole mobile phone has reached the acceptance of the crime of embezzlement in the course of business as long as the defendant left 26 cell phone from the above mobile phone sales store without the victim's consent. Accordingly, the situation where the defendant returned part of the mobile phone to the victim should be considered in the sentencing as follows).

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of criminal facts;

1. Suspension of execution under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (including the fact that there is no criminal record exceeding a fine, the fact that part of the damage inflicted on the day of the crime has been voluntarily returned to the victim, the fact that the victim agreed with the victim, and the fact