The Defendant’s written indictment on August 1, 2012 is written on July 1, 2013, but according to this, it is contradictory to the Defendant’s commencement of work in the victim company after January 3, 2013, which is the day when the Defendant began to commit the following crimes.

This seems to be a clerical error in " August 1, 2012," written in four pages of the suspect interrogation protocol (3 pages 13 of the evidence record).

From 2015 to 2015, the victim D's business employees operated by the victim C in Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Seoul, engaged in the business of supplying materials and collecting funds of the above company.

From January 3, 2013 to March 29, 2013, the Defendant received the payment of KRW 1,714,800 for 14 food materials, such as three distances, from F employees, who are customers of the victim company in Nam-gu E, Nam-gu, Nam-gu, and used KRW 50,800,00 for the victim company for personal consumption without delivering it to the victim.

From around that time to November 30, 2015, the Defendant consumed a total of KRW 86,317,456 on a total of 163 occasions, such as the list of crimes in attached Form 163.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the property of the victim while on duty.

Summary of Evidence

1. Protocol concerning the examination of suspect;

1. Each statement protocol (C);

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on transactions by customer, such as a whole certificate of registered matters, a confirmation of the use of public funds, the head of each customer, a report on investigation (Submission of materials by complainant),

1. The relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 356 and 355(1) of the Criminal Act regarding criminal facts and the grounds for sentencing [the scope of the punishment of imprisonment] [the grounds for sentencing [the scope of the punishment of imprisonment] No person who does not have a special person [the person subject to sentencing] [the decision of sentencing] [the grounds for the crime of this case, the amount of embezzlement, the defendant's attitude visible at the investigative agency, the amount of damage to the embezzlement, the amount of the criminal punishment of the defendant, the amount of the criminal punishment of the defendant, the amount of the criminal punishment of the defendant (two times a sentence of imprisonment, a suspended sentence of imprisonment, one time a suspended sentence, and two times a fine]: Provided, That the defendant is not subject to the punishment of the defendant.