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

Around June 5, 2013, the Defendant, while operating his/her mobile phone sales store in his/her own Government City C, was engaged in the business of selling the mobile phone entrusted by the victimized Company to the customers by concluding a contract on the sales of the mobile phone with the content that he/she received the mobile phone from the victimized Company, sold and opened the mobile phone to the customers, and received the payment from the customers, and then paid it to the victimized Company.

E, with the knowledge of the above fact from the Defendant on October 2013, 2013, he was delegated by the Defendant to operate the said “D” mobile phone sales store, and was engaged in the said duties.

Defendant

In addition, in the above "D" office on October 2013, E transferred the mobile phone supplied by the victimized company in accordance with the above consignment contract as collateral to a person whose name is not known, equivalent to KRW 9,484,200, total market value of 9,484,200, as stated in Nos. 1 through 9 of the List of Crimes, while working for the victimized company for the damaged company.

As a result, the defendant and E embezzled nine mobile phones owned by the victimized company in collusion.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. An interrogation protocol of the accused by the prosecution (including the substitute part of E);

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. A complaint;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (reports to repreparation a list of crimes);

1. Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of imprisonment with prison labor, inclusive, with respect to applicable Articles of law and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 32(1)1 and Article 25(3) of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc. of Application for Compensation Order, the fact that there is no criminal record of the same kind of sentencing, the profits actually acquired by the defendant are two million won, and three million won for the victim.