except that the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

From October 1, 2008 to July 13, 2012, the Defendant served as the site manager of the victim D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “victim Co., Ltd.”) located in Asan City as the victim D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “victim Co., Ltd.”) and has been engaged in field management and supervision and the duties of the general manager.

As the head of EHA site of the victim company EHA, the defendant has a duty to preserve and manage the materials and equipment of the victim company and to use them for the victim company.

피고인은 2012. 2. 초순경부터 2012. 3. 30.경까지 사이에 에티오피아의 위 EHA 도로 공사 현장 부근에서, 에티오피아 외무장관의 구두 요청에 따라 폭 14m, 길이 450m 도로 포장공사를 해 주기로 약정하고, 위와 같은 업무상 임무에 위배하여 피해자 회사 소유의 자재(골재 2,500㎡, 비투민, MC-30 등) 및 장비(그레이더, 덤프, 휄로더, 피니셔, 탄뎀롤러, 타이어롤러 등)를 이용하여 위 도로포장공사를 완료한 후, 에티오피아 측으로부터 공사대금 4,000,000birr(한화 약 258,080,000원)을 교부받음으로써 피해자 회사에 위 공사대금 상당의 피해를 입게 하고 같은 금액 상당의 이익을 취득하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. The defendant's partial statement in the second protocol of trial;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. Statement and each written confirmation of the defendant;

1. Statement of the police statement concerning F;

1. Full certificate of the registered matters;

1. Personnel cards;

1. Reports on foreign currency and a written self-payment;

1. A supplementary statement for complaint;

1. Work guidelines for each overseas employee;

1. A pledge of performance of the duty of integrity;

1. Regulations for management of overseas works;

1. The discretionary rules;

1. Stenographic records;

1. Written resolution of the personnel committee;

1. The fact-finding reply sheet;

1. The reason for conviction of comparison of construction cost is that a defense counsel only provided a duty to keep the materials of the victim company, and thus, the defendant cannot be punished as a crime of occupational breach of trust, and that the crime of occupational embezzlement is established only for the part where the defendant arbitrarily used and disposed of the materials of the victim