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

From July 4, 2016, the Defendant was working as the vice president of the victim D Co., Ltd., Ltd., in Gyeonggi-si from around July 4, 2016, and was engaged in the above company fund management affairs.

On June 28, 2017, the Defendant embezzled KRW 57,321,00,00 in total, from around 9, 2018, from that time until February 2018, by arbitrarily consuming KRW 57,321,00 throughout the period from February 9, 2018, while withdrawing KRW 200,000 in cash, which was kept in the account of the Nonghyup Bank in the name of the victim for the victim for the sake of the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the defendant's partial statement E witness, F's each legal statement's employment certificate, details of deposit transactions by account, and results of transfer management;

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. Although it is recognized that the defendant transferred or withdrawn money from the account of victim D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim”) as stated in the judgment of the defendant's assertion on the assertion of the defendant and defense counsel under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Code, the defendant has no intention of unlawful acquisition since it was used for the business funds of the victimized Co., Ltd., and thus,

Judgment

(a) The intention of unlawful acquisition in the crime of occupational embezzlement means the intention of taking the same disposition with respect to the property of another person, which is kept in violation of his/her occupational duty, for the purpose of seeking the benefit of himself/herself or a third party;

If the representative director of a corporation withdraws and uses the company's money, and fails to present evidentiary materials as to the place of use, and fails to give reasonable explanation as to the reason for the withdrawal and the place of use, he may withdraw the company's money with the intent of unlawful acquisition and use it for personal use.

Supreme Court Decision 2013Do2510 Decided June 27, 2013