However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

On July 1, 2014, the Defendant entered into a service contract, a single type of consignment sales contract, with the content that he/she sells clothing owned by the victim Company B (hereinafter referred to as “victim Company”) and is to receive fees therefrom, and around that time, he/she took charge of affairs, such as sales of clothing, store, inventory management, etc., at the fourth department store of Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Seoul department store from that time to May 24, 2019.

From around 2015, the Defendant sold clothes owned by the victim in the course of carrying out business due to business depressions caused by the influence of Internet shopping, etc., which were economically difficult, and had the victim use proceeds at will.

From that time until May 24, 2019, the Defendant, at the foregoing “D” store, embezzled the sum of KRW 1,338,617,965 at KRW 84,965 in the victim’s clothes owned by the Defendant, as indicated in the attached list of crimes, by stating that the Defendant would make cash payments to the customers who have purchased the clothing, and sold the same under the said condition to the customers who agreed to do so, and received cash payments and arbitrarily consumed the same.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to petition for complaint and accompanying documents;

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

1. The main sentence of Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. For the reason of sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act, comprehensively taking into account the following factors: (a) the amount of occupational embezzlement by a defendant is large amount or smoothly agreed with a victim after the prosecution; (b) the defendant recognized his/her mistake and did not have the criminal records exceeding the same kind and fine; and (c) the defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime; and (d) all the sentencing conditions specified in the pleadings, such as circumstances after