The Defendant is a person who served as an accounting employee in Yangsan-si Co., Ltd. D from January 10, 2003 to February 10, 2014 and has been engaged in accounting-related affairs, such as purchase, sale, and management of corporation cards.

On November 6, 2010, the Defendant purchased goods at the New World department store store located in the Busan Ma-dong, Busan Ma-gu, Busan Ma-dong, and settled the price with the corporate debt card (credit card number: E) of the victim company, which was in his/her custody, and violated his/her duties from May 20, 2009 to June 12, 2013, and thereby, violated his/her duties and caused a total amount of KRW 348,029,915 in total on 1,478 occasions as indicated in the attached list of crimes, including the purchase of personal goods or provision of services, and settled the price with the corporate credit card of the victim company, thereby acquiring economic benefits equivalent thereto and causing property damage equivalent to the same amount to the victim company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Court statement of the defendant (which is made on the sixth trial date);

1. Each testimony of witness F and G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the transaction details of passbooks (Evidence Nos. 10);

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 356 of the Criminal Act and Articles 355 (2) of the Criminal Act ( comprehensively taking into account the relevant provisions of the Act and the choice of punishment) of the same Act;

1. The basic area (one to three years) (one-three years) of the sentencing criteria [the scope of recommendations] types 2 (the amount between KRW 100 million and KRW 500 million)

2. The Defendant: (a) obtained pecuniary benefits equivalent to KRW 340,000,000 in total for four years by using the victim’s corporate card that he/she had been on duty as an accounting officer of the victim company for personal purposes; and (b) considering the fact that not only committed the instant crime for a long time but also the fact that the amount of damage would have increased, the Defendant’s punishment on the Defendant is inevitable, focusing on the nature of the relevant crime.

However, the defendant.