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

The defendant works as an employee in charge of accounting at the victim C hotel located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, and has been engaged in the receipt of credit payment, etc.

On April 28, 2006, the Defendant voluntarily consumed KRW 242,849,659 on a total of 46 occasions, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table, from around April 11, 2008, a total of 46 times until April 11, 2008, while the Defendant was engaged in the business of making a cash deposit of KRW 147,400 from “D” to “D” for the damaged company’s account.

Ultimately, the Defendant embezzled the victim’s property on duty.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement protocol by the police for E;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes, such as a copy of each deposit certificate, details of each transaction, and a statement of issuance of each processing slips;

1. Relevant Article 356 of the Criminal Act and Articles 355 (1) (main sentence) and Article 355 of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment for the crime;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act / [the scope of the recommended sentence] Class 1 (100 million won or more to be less than 500 million won) / [6-2 years] in the mitigated area (a person with a special mitigation], or where significant damage has been recovered (a decision of sentencing], the confession and reflection are made; the amount of embezzlement is fully repaid and the victim does not want the punishment by mutual consent with the victim; the defendant's age, sex behavior, environment, family relationship, motive and consequence of the crime; the circumstances after the crime were committed; and other circumstances constituting the conditions for sentencing as shown in the trial process of this case shall be determined as ordered.