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

The Defendant, from March 5, 2004 to October 31, 2008, was an accounting employee of the high-railroad retail chain E operated by the victim D with the victim D with the victim D with the victim No. 4 302 Dong-si from March 5, 2004 to October 31, 2008, and was engaged in the management and expenditure of the purchase and sale of the scrap metal of E, and managed the F, G, and H deposit accounts established and operated by the victim under the name

On February 20, 2008, the Defendant withdrawn KRW 4.7 million from the deposit account in the name of the Defendant in the bank account in the name of the F and deposited into the deposit account in the name of the Defendant for the victim. On the same day, the Defendant transferred the money to the deposit account in the name of the Defendant’s senior mother, and then withdrawn it at that time and consumed it for personal purposes such as payment of fraternity money.

The defendant from January 16, 2008 to the same year.

9. Until December 25, 200, a total of KRW 37.2 million was consumed by the same method 13 times in total, such as in the annexed list of crimes.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement made in D among the protocol of interrogation of the suspect against the accused by the prosecution;

1. Details of the financial transactions in G accounts;

1. Details of the financial transactions in H (K);

1. Details of the financial transactions in the F (L) account;

1. A copy of the description of business bank account in the name of the suspect M;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on account transactions;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act which choose a penalty;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act in the suspended sentence is against the defendant, the primary offender, and the victim appears to have returned a significant portion of the amount of embezzlement. The so-called "defensing company" in the above employees' name for the purpose of reducing taxes, which led the defendant to manage the account. The date of the complaint in this case after the withdrawal of the defendant.