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

On November 20, 2013, the Defendant: (a) purchased 85,500,000 won in the name of the transport company (owner) in the name of the carriage company, for the purpose of securing the purchase price of the said vehicle; (b) obtained a loan of KRW 85,50,000 with the non-Korean Capital Co., Ltd. and the principal of the loan; (c) concluded an installment financing transaction agreement on the installment financing transaction with the principal and interest of KRW 1,729,540 each month on the part of the owner of the said vehicle in installments over 60 months; and (d) set up a mortgage on the said vehicle by the mortgagee at KRW 59,80,000,000, in order to cover the purchase price of the said vehicle.

In such a case, even though the Defendant has a duty to preserve the value of the object as a collateral for the victim company, the Defendant, despite having a duty to preserve the value of the object on March 30, 2014, borrowed KRW 40 million from the bond company called Incheon at the coffee shop where it is impossible to know the trade name in Incheon at around March 30, 201, and provided the said vehicle as collateral and transferred possession by transferring the possession, thereby acquiring property benefits equivalent to the amount of installment financing (the principal of the unpaid amount to be paid at the time) and causing property damage equivalent to the same amount to the victim company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against the non-Korean Capital Company;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a copy of an application for installment financing and a copy of the protocol of impossibility of delivery of automobiles;

1. Article 355 (2) and (1) of the Criminal Act, and the choice of imprisonment with prison labor for the crime;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is that the instant crime of breach of trust falls under the category 1 (less than 100 million won) where the mitigation area (one month to October), the punishment of a person who has been specially mitigated, or the case where a significant damage has been restored.

The punishment shall be determined as ordered in consideration of these circumstances and the fact that the defendant is faithfully living without any criminal history exceeding a fine.