A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

On November 25, 2013, the Defendant entered into a car lease agreement with the Dom Dom Bag Capital Co., Ltd. in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government on November 25, 2013 with respect to the Dom Dom Dom Dom 938-21, with respect to the Dom Dom Dom Dom 938-21, with respect to the Dom 740Li vehicles owned by the victim company (2013 Form), with the acquisition price of the Dom 740Li

The contents of the above lease agreement include: (a) the Defendant received the above vehicle from the victim company and paid KRW 3,549,600 each month from 25th day to 41 times each month; and (b) KRW 3,522,911 to 42 times each month; and (c) the ownership of the above vehicle during the above period is the victim company; and (d) the Defendant is prohibited from disposing of the said vehicle without the victim company’s consent, such as sale, transfer, and creation of mortgage.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, while using and keeping the foregoing vehicle under lease, provided and embezzled the said vehicle as collateral without the consent of the victim company while borrowing KRW 35 million from the victim company while paying only the lease fee three times on March 2014.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement of the accused in the first protocol of trial;

1. Written complaint of Capital Capital;

1. Application of the terms and conditions of a lease agreement, a motor vehicle lease agreement, a motor vehicle lease agreement, a motor vehicle register, a protocol not to dispose of corporeal movables, a certified copy of protocol of the Jeonju District Court;

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

2. The reason for the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (the circumstances favorable to the defendant in the following sentencing) is considerably high in the amount of damage caused by the instant crime, and the fact that the victim’s vehicle was distributed in a large range due to the instant crime and abused as a means of crime or tax evasion, etc., which may cause social harm and injury is disadvantageous to the defendant.

However, the defendant committed the crime of this case.