Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 1,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, in collusion with C on December 14, 2012, embezzled the victim’s property by providing as security the victim’s property by borrowing KRW 10 million from H through the above E, upon the request of the victim G to sell the goods at the time of the market price at which C was kept for the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Examination protocol of suspect C by the prosecution;

1. Each police suspect interrogation protocol against the accused (including the C’s statement);

1. Statement of the police officer to I;

1. A complaint;

1. A certificate of storage of goods, and photographs thereof;

1. A copy of a bankbook;

1. A security contract;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to a report on investigation (Attachment to the rulings concerned), a report on investigation (E counterpart investigation), an investigation report (top the market price at the audience sprinking);

1. Relevant provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 355 (1) and 30 of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of punishment;

1. Articles 70 (1) and 69 (2) of the Criminal Act for the detention of a workhouse;

1. The reason for sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act Article 334(1) recognizes and reflects the instant crime as the age of 78 years old, and the fact that the Defendant did not have any profit gained by the instant crime is favorable to the Defendant.

However, there are a number of criminal records against the defendant, as well as those who had been punished for the same kind of crime two times, the defendant does not seem to have been actively involved in the crime of this case, the defendant acquired money and valuables from the accomplice C under the pretext of introduction expenses, and received part of the profits from the crime of this case by acquiring money and valuables from the accomplice C, and other factors for sentencing specified in the argument of this case are considered as excessive fines specified in the summary order of this case. Thus, the punishment of this case shall be determined as per Disposition.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.