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

The Defendant, who is operating the D household store in Daegu Northern-gu C, was aware of the victim G who is operating the F household store in Busan Maritime Transportation Daegu E, introduced the above F household store to H who wants to purchase the imported household.

Therefore, H purchased the imported household from the above FF household store, and transferred the purchase price of KRW 36.5 million to the Defendant on November 3, 2012.

However, the Defendant transferred KRW 13.5 million to the victim while being kept for the victim, and embezzled the remainder of KRW 23 million on November 3 through 4, 2012 by arbitrarily using the same to repay his/her obligation.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning G;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (related to the submission of specifications);

1. Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes and Article 355 of the Election of Imprisonment;

1. Suspension of execution under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (the fact that the defendant is against himself, the fact that there is no previous conviction exceeding the fine, the fact that the defendant has repaid nine million won out of the amount of damage, the embezzlement of sentencing criteria, the embezzlement of less than 10 million won, the basic area, the imprisonment between April and April, etc.);

1. Social service order under Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act;