The sentence of sentence against the defendant shall be suspended.

Punishment of the crime

From July 2017, the Defendant was in office as the victim B representative director from around July 2017, and is engaged in the operation of the above company and the management and execution of funds from around August 2018.

On August 13, 2018, the Defendant approved 38,000 won with a physical card from an enterprise bank account in the name of the victim, which the Defendant keeps in his/her custody in his/her duties, for personal purposes at a non-permanent and non-permanent location, and used the total of 708,000 won for personal purposes over three times from August 13, 2018 to August 28, 2019 as shown in attached Table No. 27,29,30 of the daily list of crimes.

Summary of Evidence

1. The application of the laws and regulations on the statement by the police as to the defendant's partial statement D (E) account records, account records by the company bank (C) account records by the company bank, and account records by the bank (F) account records

1. Relevant legal provisions concerning criminal facts, Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the selection of a sentence, and a fine of one million won to suspend the sentence of a fine, which shall be imposed upon the choice of a fine;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act (100,000 won per day) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The suspended sentence asserts that Article 59(1) of the Criminal Act (i.e., the amount of embezzlement is a small amount, the primary offender is the age of 76 years, etc.) of the same Act (i.e., the defendant and his defense counsel used funds on criminal facts as indicated in the judgment for the company, and thus cannot be deemed to constitute embezzlement.

However, if the representative director of a corporation withdraws and uses the company's money, and fails to present evidentiary materials as to its place of use, and fails to provide reasonable explanation as to the reason for withdrawal and the place of use, he/she may withdraw the company's money with the intent of unlawful acquisition and use it for personal purposes (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Do2510, Jun. 27, 2013). The defendant and the defense counsel used it for the victim company.

The argument is that the evidence is not presented, and it is possible to understand how to use it as activity expenses in detail.