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

The defendant is a person who has been engaged in the management of the company's funds with the authority to deposit and withdraw from the main transaction passbook in the name of one bank, modern securities stock account, etc. in the name of the above company while serving as the representative director of the company D in the fourth floor of Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government building C.

A. From September 23, 2016 to September 24, 2016, the Defendant: (a) kept the funds of KRW 146,70,000 owned by the said company in the main transaction passbook in the said one bank account in the victim’s name D; (b) released the said funds in mind four times in total; and (c) embezzled the said funds by voluntarily consuming loans, etc. in Seoul.

B. On October 5, 2016, the Defendant sold stocks, bonds, etc. of another company owned by the Defendant Company D, to another person, and deposited them in the course of business with the amount of KRW 101,520,714, and withdrawn it in mind, and then embezzled it by voluntarily consuming loans, etc. from the Seoul Company around that time.

As above, the Defendant violated the Defendant’s occupational duty, and thereby embezzled KRW 248,220,714 owned by the said victim D for the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of the suspect against the accused (including the E-examination part);

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. G Fact-finding certificates and meeting minutes of the board of directors;

1. The details of inquiries into the details of transactions in the D Han Bank, the details of transactions in D Hyundai Securities, and the application of statutes governing the release of modern securities;

1. Relevant Article of the Criminal Act and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act (generally, selection of imprisonment with prison labor);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act in the suspension of execution is the amount of the criminal defendant’s embezzlement and the amount of personal benefits, which is large and large, and the damage was almost not recovered in relation to the victim company, and the representative director of the victim company who now desires to be punished by the defendant’s severe punishment.