The Defendant is a person who served as the management support office of C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “victim Co., Ltd.”) for the purpose of software development, wholesale and retail business from July 2006 to October 2016, and has overall control over the financial and accounting affairs of the above company and managed and executed funds.

피고인은 2012. 1. 25.경 서울 서초구 E건물 B동 14층에 있는 피해자 회사 사무실에서, 거래처로부터 수금하여 피해자 회사의 은행계좌에 업무상 보관 중이던 위 회사의 자금 중 1,500만 원을 자기앞수표로 발행한 후, 그 무렵 서울 시내 일원에서 상품권을 샀다가 되파는 방법으로 위 수표를 현금화한 다음 이를 지인인 F 명의로 개설한 증권계좌에 입금하여 피고인의 선물옵션 투자금으로 사용한 것을 비롯하여, 그때부터 2016. 10. 10.경까지 별지 범죄일람표(순번 6, 29, 45, 66, 71, 122, 123, 126, 128, 129, 133, 134, 145, 152, 155, 157, 161, 165-167, 170, 174, 179, 181, 186 71191) 71재와 같이 총 191회에 걸쳐 피해자 회사의 자금 합계 4,708,527,338원을 위 증권계좌에 입금하여 피고인의 선물옵션 투자금으로 사용하였다. 이로써 피고인은 업무상 보관 중이던 피해자 회사의 자금 합계 4,708,527,338원을 임의로 사용하여 횡령하였다.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Each police statement made to F and D;

1. Each investigation report [Attachment of F alternative securities trading statement, hearing of the statement by the representative of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., hearing of the statement by the G attorney-at-law, hearing of F telephone statement, submitting a complaint by G attorney-at-law, attaching documents attached to the statement of the national bank account in the name of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., appending documents attached to the statement of the securities bank account in the name of the F, attaching documents attached to the statement of the securities bank account in the name of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd., filing of the complaint (No. 784), filing of documents attached to the statement of the statement, confirmation of profits and losses of the domestic company A's futures option product investment in the name of the internal company, entry of the securities account in the name of F (for each transaction classification between November 1, 2011 and December 31, 2017), attachment of the statement of Korean bank account in the name

Application of Statutes

1. Article applicable to criminal facts;

Article 3 (1) 2 of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes, Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act (In general), the reason for sentencing; 1. The scope of punishment by law: Three years to 30 years of imprisonment;

2. Scope of recommendations according to the sentencing criteria;

[Determination of Punishment] Type 3 (at least KRW 500 million but less than KRW 5 billion)

[Scope of Recommendation] Two to Five years of imprisonment (Basic Area)

[Scope of the revised sentencing] Three to Five years of imprisonment (the lowest limit of the applicable sentencing in law is higher than the recommended sentencing)

3. The instant crime committed by the following: (a) the Defendant, who took overall control of the finance and accounting of the software development company, embezzled the company’s funds amounting to KRW 4.7 billion in total over four years; and (b) consumed the investment in its futures option by taking advantage of the company’s funds. A large amount of damage exists; (c) the Defendant’s commission of the crime appears to have led to the bankruptcy of the victim company; and (d) the Defendant has the history of having been sentenced to the same criminal punishment

However, while the defendant was raising extra funds according to the instruction of the representative director, he was found to have committed the crime of this case, and some of the embezzlement was returned to the company, recognized the error and actively cooperated in the investigation. In addition to these various circumstances, the defendant's age, character and environment, relationship with the victim, motive and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, etc., the same punishment as the order shall be determined within the scope of recommended sentencing guidelines, taking into account the various circumstances shown in the oral proceedings, such as the defendant's age

The acquittal portion

1. The summary of the facts charged (the summary of the crime list Nos. 6, 29, 45, 66, 71, 122, 123, 126, 128, 129, 133, 134, 145, 152, 155, 157, 161, 165-167, 170, 174, 179, 181, and 186)

In addition to making deposits in the securities account in the name of the accused (hereinafter referred to as the "securities account of the accused") and using it as a futures option investment, additional amounts to 6, 29, 45, 66, 71, 122, 123, 126, 128, 129, 133, 134, 145, 152, 155, 157, 161, 165-167, 170, 174, 179, 181, 1867 97 297 5,06,3738,388 of the funds of the victim company were embezzled for total amount of 298,000 won of the funds of the victim company over 25 times in total.

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s legal statement and each investigation report (in lieu of F’s name, attaching data on the reorganization of each item of securities account, and attaching details of the amount of embezzlement funds) are admitted as evidence consistent with or consistent with this part of the facts charged. However, this Court duly adopted and examined evidence.

In light of the following facts and circumstances, it is difficult to eliminate the possibility that the above KRW 298,00,00 is not the funds of the victim company or would be combined with the embezzlement amount in the holding.

1) While the Defendant was managing the new bank, our bank, national bank, and other accounts (hereinafter collectively referred to as “company bank accounts”) of the victim company, the Defendant created funds to make rebates to the customer according to D’s instructions, a representative director, and kept them separately in the depository, etc. The Defendant has left the opportunity to make rebates. The Defendant left the funds of the victim company in the manner of withdrawing checks from the company bank accounts through gift certificate business operators, and depositing them into the Defendant’s securities account by cashing them through gift certificate business operators, ② withdrawing checks or cash from the company bank accounts to the Defendant’s securities account as they are, ③ directly remitting them from the company bank accounts to the Defendant’s securities account, ④ transferring the company’s transaction proceeds to the Defendant’s securities account from the company bank accounts to the Defendant’s securities account.

2) A prosecutor did not specify the company funds that the Defendant embezzled by withdrawing from the bank accounts of the company or keeping them in custody at the treasury, etc., but did not specify the company funds of the Defendant in each item, but filed the instant prosecution by regarding the sum of KRW 741,356,00 in cash, the sum of KRW 52 million in cash, the sum of the checks, KRW 2,039,659,58 in total, and the company bank accounts, KRW 2,173,557,750 in total, transferred from the Defendant’s bank accounts, customer of the company, gift certificate provider, and KRW 5,06,573,338 in total, as the funds embezzled by the Defendant.

3) On this issue, the Defendant stated in this court that he recognized the entire facts charged, including KRW 298,00,000 of this part of the facts charged. However, the Prosecution has withdrawn cash or checks from the Defendant’s securities account and again deposited into the said securities account. As such, the amount re-deposited overlaps with the amount of embezzlement calculated by the Prosecutor, and the Defendant submitted a statement (Evidence Record 3120,000,000,000 won) to the effect that the actual amount of embezzlement is 4.76669,000,000 won when analyzing the detailed contents used by the Defendant for embezzlement of funds of the victim company, and this court also claims the same purport as the sentencing grounds.

4) Examining the details of check and cash withdrawals from the bank account of the company, the fact that each of the money listed in the attached list of crimes except this part of the charges was returned to the Defendant’s securities account or was withdrawn in check or in cash at the bank account of the company immediately before the money was deposited into the Defendant’s securities account, and the sum of the money was KRW 4,871,227,059 (Evidence No. 3111). However, each of the charges did not appear to have been withdrawn before the Defendant’s securities account was deposited into the Defendant’s securities account, and there was no evidence showing that the source of the money deposited was the Defendant’s funds.

5) Meanwhile, in the Defendant’s securities account withdrawal statement, it is confirmed that the sum of KRW 856 million in cash, KRW 396,394,874 in cash, and KRW 192,000 in check was withdrawn during the criminal period as indicated in the Defendant’s securities account withdrawal statement. As a result, the Defendant stored part of the said withdrawal amount in a depository, etc. and deposited it again into the Defendant’s securities account, it is likely that the sum of the charges in this part of the facts charged was added to the amount of embezzlement.

B. As above, despite the Defendant’s statement recognizing the entire facts charged, the Defendant’s embezzlement of KRW 298,046,00 in excess of KRW 4,708,527,338 as indicated in the judgment of the lower court was proven to the extent that there is no reasonable doubt to regard that the Defendant embezzled KRW 298,046,00 of the facts charged, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, this part of the facts charged should be pronounced not guilty pursuant to the latter part of Article 325 of the Criminal Procedure Act because there is no proof of crime. However, as long as it is found guilty of the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Embezzlement) in the judgment related to this comprehensive crime,

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.

Judges Kim Young-ho

Judgment of the Prosecutor

The specific facts are partially recognized differently from the facts charged.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.

A person shall be appointed.