From July 15, 2013 to July 8, 2016, the Defendant was in charge of the storage, management, delivery, and accounting of waste scrap metal from the warehouse of the victim D Co., Ltd. located in Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City.

On April 29, 2016, the Defendant sold 80 tons of waste scrap metal, which was in custody for the victim company, to E, and embezzled for business purposes by selling 50 million won of waste metal, which was in custody for the victim company.

In addition, the Defendant had been kept in the above warehouse over 20 times from July 2, 2015 to April 29, 2016, as shown in the list of crimes in attached Form 20.

180 tons of waste scrap metal market value of 480,084,119 won was embezzled in the course of business by selling to E 103,910,000 won.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects of the accused and E by the prosecution;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of each police statement protocol to F;

1. The grounds for sentencing under the pertinent Article of the Act and Articles 356 and 355(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts [the scope of recommendation] [the scope of punishment] 2 types (one to three years from 100 million won) (one to 500 million won) of the basic area (one to one year from 100 million won), and 355(1) of the Criminal Act (the number of persons subject to special sentencing] (the decision of sentence is heavy, and the victim did not reach an agreement with the victim, it is inevitable to sentence the defendant as to the defendant.

However, the fact that the defendant acknowledges all of the crimes of this case and separates his mistake, that there is no record of criminal punishment other than a fine once, shall be considered in favorable circumstances, and the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and circumstance of the crime, degree of substantial damage, circumstances after the crime, etc. shall be determined as ordered by taking into account the various sentencing conditions specified in the arguments of this case, such as the defendant's age, sex, environment, motive and circumstance