A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, 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

From March 30, 2005 to September 30, 2008, the Defendant worked as the head of Sungnam-si Office of Management of G building in the above building and engaged in the business of collecting rent, management expenses, etc. of the above building. On April 6, 2006, the Defendant kept 1,80,000 won deposited in the Defendant’s deposit account for the victim, including the amount of arbitrarily withdrawn and consumed it for personal purposes on April 6, 2006, and then embezzled 335,218,50 won per annum 1 to 5,218,50 won per annum 1,27 to 127, and then embezzled 279,860 won among the above money for the victim and embezzled 1,80,000 won to the Defendant’s private deposit account for the remainder of 1,80,000 won for the victim’s deposit account, from May 31, 2006 to the Defendant’s private deposit account.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of the witness F and J;

1. Each protocol of examination of the accused by the prosecution (including the F statement portion in each protocol);

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol against the accused (including the F's statement in the second protocol);

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. Data on the settlement of accounts A and data submitted to suspects;

1. A report on investigation (data submitted by a suspect), a report on an investigation (data submitted by a complainant), a report on an investigation (the details of account transactions of a suspect's credit union and deposit of combined fire-fighting forces);

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act which choose a penalty;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Determination on the defendant's assertion of Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act

1. First, the Defendant asserts that, from July 8, 2006 to February 15, 2008, the sum of KRW 17,704,100, which the Defendant remitted to I who is the Defendant’s wife over 11 times, is the Defendant’s salary received from F as the head of the management office, and that it does not constitute embezzlement.

In light of the above evidence, the above evidence can be admitted.