A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

1. On October 1, 2012, the Defendant: (a) at the Certified Judicial Scriveners Office of Jung-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City, 406, the Defendant received from the victim E an auction of KRW 204,504,000,000,000 from the victim E to auction of KRW 12,030,000; (b) around October 17, 2012, the Defendant issued a cashier’s check of KRW 1,203,00 at the Jung-gu, Incheon, Jung-gu, Jung-gu, Incheon; (c) but (d) failed to bid at auction, the above cashier’s check was kept.

However, in November 2012, the defendant did not return the above check to the victim, but used it as office operating expenses at his own discretion and embezzled it.

2. On October 24, 2012, the Defendant: (a) ordered the victim J to vicariously perform the registration work of K apartment 828 Dong 1505, Jung-gu, Incheon, Jung-gu, Incheon, which was sold by the victim to the victim J; and (b) received 3.76 million won as the registration fee from November 22, 2012 to keep it in custody.

However, in November 2012, the Defendant embezzled the money to arbitrarily use it as office operating expenses, instead of returning it to the victim in Incheon, in the middle of November 2012.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes of each police statement to E and J;

1. Relevant Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act and the choice of imprisonment with labor for the crime;

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Type 1 (100,000) (1 to 10 months) of the mitigated area (20,000), the scope of the recommended punishment is not subject to punishment;

2. Determination of sentence of this case does not include the nature of the crime, but the above special mitigation factors and the violation, the fact that there is no record of punishment exceeding the same kind of punishment and fine, and other various factors of sentencing, including the defendant's age, character, conduct and environment, shall be determined in consideration of the punishment.