However, it is against the Defendants for two years from the date of the conclusion of the judgment.

Defendant

On June 17, 2011, A was sentenced to a suspended sentence of 8 months for the crime of forging private documents at the Seoul Central District Court, and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

Defendant

A is the representative director of I Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "I") and Defendant B took overall charge of the accounting affairs as the office of Defendant A's spouse interest I.

From February 2009, the victim E delegated the application for the purchase of real estate auction to I at the request of the defendant A.

On April 7, 2011, the Defendants arbitrarily used KRW 100,000 from the Korean bank account (Account Number:J) in the name of the victim to the new bank account (Account Number:K) in the name of the Defendant.

As a result, the Defendants conspired and embezzled the property of the victim in violation of his/her duties.

Summary of Evidence

1. Entry of part of the witness E in the second public trial protocol;

1. Protocol concerning the interrogation of suspects by the prosecution against the defendant B (four times, replacement of the complainants), (3484 pages of the investigation records);

1. A detailed statement of transaction in passbook E (105 pages of investigation records), replies (18 No. 18 of evidence list, 495 pages of investigation records), replies (40 No. 40 of evidence list, 1351 of investigation records), disbursement details (163-1638 of investigation records)

1. A criminal investigation report (Attachment of criminal suspect A, B, L, I, and E account details) (372 pages of investigation records);

1. Previous convictions in judgment: Application of investigation reports (A), and statutes;

1. The Defendants of the relevant law and the choice of punishment regarding criminal facts: Articles 356, 355 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act;

1. Defendant A who handles concurrent crimes: After Article 37 of the Criminal Act, Article 39 (1);

1. Defendants on probation: Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (The following favorable circumstances are considered for the reasons for sentencing);

1. Determination as to the defendants and their defense counsel's assertion under Articles 32 (1) 3 and 32 (2) and 25 (3) 3 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Lawsuits for Dismissal of Application for Compensation (the scope of compensation by the defendants is unclear and thus, it is not reasonable to issue an order for compensation)

1. The summary of the assertion;