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.

On September 24, 2012, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the victim Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. on the condition that 1,624,700 won each month pay 1,62,00 won at an agency of the Dansung Co., Ltd. for 36 months more than 1,624,70 won, and received the above Donz car equivalent to 68 million won at the market price owned by the victim company on the same day.

The Defendant borrowed KRW 23 million from the needy in a F plant operated by the victim E at Sinsi-si in May 2013 while keeping the said benz car for the victim company in accordance with the said car lease agreement, and offered the said benz car as security by delivering the said benz car to the handicapped.

Accordingly, the Defendant embezzled the property of the victim company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement concerning G in the police statement protocol;

1. Application of each Act or subordinate statute to lease application and registration certificate;

1. Relevant Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection, etc. of Social Service Order does not seem to have concluded a lease contract with the intention to borrow money from the beginning using the instant vehicle from the beginning. The fact that the financial situation of the company, which had been operated for a certain period, would have led to the instant crime due to aggravation of the financial situation of the company, and the fact that the amount of the instant embezzlement would have led to the instant crime, including the amount of the instant embezzlement,