beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than one year and six months.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
On November 30, 2015, the Defendant was sentenced to one year of imprisonment for fraud, two years of suspended execution, and the judgment became final and conclusive on December 8, 2015. On July 14, 2016, the same court was sentenced to four months of imprisonment for an occupational breach of trust and became final and conclusive on September 28, 2016.
1. Crimes against the victim B;
A. A. Around April 2013, the Defendant: (a) sold E vehicles, a vehicle owned by the said company, to the victim B at the D office of the Defendant’s management Co., Ltd., which was located in P at the time of strike; and (b) received KRW 20 million from the said victim for the purpose of paying the remaining installment of the said vehicle; and (c) embezzled such vehicle by arbitrarily consuming it with the company’s operating funds at that time.
B. Although the Defendant in occupational breach of trust has a duty to manage the said vehicle entirely in accordance with the entrance contract with the said victim, he/she provided the said vehicle as security without the consent of the said victim by obtaining a loan of KRW 70 million from F Co., Ltd. at the above office around August 30, 2013, and offered the said vehicle as security without the said victim’s consent, by creating a mortgage causing KRW 70 million in the value of the claim in the future of the said company, and acquired the same amount of pecuniary benefits, and suffered property damage equivalent to the said victim.
2. Although the Defendant, in breach of occupational duty against the victim G, has a duty to fully manage the H New Zealand Tourism Bus in accordance with the Plaintiff’s entry contract with G, the Defendant provided the said vehicle as security without the said victim’s consent while obtaining a loan of KRW 99 million from a mutual infinite loan company at a non-finite place on October 16, 2013, and offered the said vehicle as security without the said victim’s consent, and established a mortgage at the claim value equivalent to the said amount in the future of the said lending company, thereby acquiring property benefits equivalent to the said amount and causing property damage equivalent to the said victim’s amount of money.
3. On February 21, 2014, the Defendant against the victim I by telephone to the victim I at a non-permanent place.