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

From around September 192, the Defendant, a non-liability member of the victim limited partnership company C in Hongcheon-gun, Gangwon-gun, as a member of the victim limited partnership B, has been in charge of managing the D account (Account Number and EF) in the name of the said company, and has deposited and managing the taxi commission collected from the said company’s taxi officers into the passbook of the corporation.

When the Defendant kept the victim’s money in his/her business as above, on October 26, 201, he/she arbitrarily transferred KRW 50 million from the D’s above D account (Account Number E) to the H account (Account Number I) in the name of the Defendant at the point of Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, Hongcheon-gun, and then transferred the victim’s money to the H account in the name of the Defendant, and then arbitrarily consumed KRW 92,84,463 in total four times from around that time to August 4, 2014, including the Defendant’s J’s deposit money.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property on duty.

Summary of Evidence

1. The legal statement of K Witness;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused by the prosecution;

1. Statement made by the police against K or L;

1. A complete certificate of registered matters, an employment rules organization agreement, articles of association, etc.;

1. Each of the CD account transaction details (E), Defendant’s name H bank account transaction details (I), CD account transaction details (F) [in order for Defendant, a representative of the victimized company, to pay to his children, etc. not for the company, the Defendant’s withdrawal and use of the company’s funds under the name of provisional payment, etc., such as No. 1 and No. 2 of the CD List No. 1 and No. 2 of the CD List, and the Defendant’s withdrawal and use of the company’s funds for the purpose of paying them to his children, etc., without undergoing lawful procedures such as the resolution of the employee, is beyond the generally acceptable scope, and thus constitutes embezzlement.

In addition, the amount that the defendant paid to the company with the interest on the money borrowed from the company (the defendant is the person to whom it is recognized).