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

On December 28, 2012, the Defendant purchased 9,00,000 won from the victim Aju Capital Co., Ltd. with the 1198-29 tons of cargo at the office of Dream Co., Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the 1198-29, and the Defendant’s father D in the name of the Defendant’s father, while borrowing 9,000 won from the victim Aju Capital Co., Ltd. with the purchase fund of the cargo at KRW 3,956,396,396, 2-50, and 3,07,30 won each time for 50 months (the condition that the difference between 3,956,396, 2-50, 3,07, and 30 won each time for 50 months) of the indictment on January 11, 2013 is correct ex officio.

At the same time, as the above cargo was registered as the owner of the cargo in the first instance of a limited company with limited liability, and at the same time, as the above cargo was set up a collateral with the value of 99,00,000 won for the mortgagee's company, the mortgagee's bonds, and thus, the defendant has a duty to keep the cargo in accordance with the purpose of the collateral, such as not unfairly decreasing the collateral value until the repayment of the loan.

However, even though the principal borrowed to a police officer in violation of the above duty remains at KRW 68,792,235 on October 2014, the Defendant borrowed KRW 22,500,000 in cash from a person in violation of the above duty, and transferred the freight to a person in violation of the duty, thereby making it difficult or impossible for the Defendant to exercise the right to collateral security against the victim.

Accordingly, the Defendant acquired pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 22,500,000 borrowed from the above Buddhist person, and incurred damages equivalent to KRW 68,792,235, which is the remaining principal of the loan to the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Written complaint and accompanying documents of the Aju Capital Company;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (the details of telephone conversations with witnesses F);

1. Relevant Article 355 of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 355 (2) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of punishment;

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

1. The scope of recommended punishment according to sentencing guidelines under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act [the scope of recommended punishment] Class 1 (the amount less than 100 million won) is the mitigation area (one month to October).