From November 30, 2015, the Defendant is an employee who was working in the “E” office operated by the victim D from November 30, 2015 to E.

On December 5, 2015, the Defendant tried to arrange the transaction of BMW740LI owned by another commercial company to the customer F for the victim around 18:00.

First of all, the payment for vehicles to be paid to the company

In other words, “the victim received money from the injured party and received money from the injured party to the company as if the vehicle were paid as the price.”

However, in fact, the defendant did not have any intention or ability to pay the above money to the commercial person with the intention to use it for personal purposes such as repayment of debt immediately.

Nevertheless, the defendant received 29.9 million won from the damaged person to the company bank account (G) in the name of the defendant for the same day as the vehicle price.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statements made to D;

1. The grounds for sentencing under Article 347(1) of the Criminal Code of the pertinent Article on criminal facts are as follows: (a) the accused led to the confession of the instant crime; and (b) the accused has no same criminal record; and (c) the accused has no criminal record. Meanwhile, the fact that the Defendant did not reach an agreement with the victim is a reason for sentencing disadvantageous to the Defendant

In addition to the above sentencing grounds, in full view of all the circumstances including the defendant's age, occupation, family relation, etc., the punishment shall be determined within the scope of the sentencing criteria (the basic area: June - January 6), and the defendant shall not be bound by this court in order to give the defendant an opportunity to agree with the victim.