beta
Text
A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.
However, the execution of the above sentence shall be suspended for a period of one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.
Reasons
Punishment of the crime
1. The Defendant in breach of trust related to the 20 million won foot No. 10 million won is the owner who operated the 20 million won foot No. 1 per unit from June 20, 2013 to January 20, 2015, respectively, with the 20 million won unit per unit from around June 20, 2013 to around January 20, and the above number No. 20,000 won per unit are operated in a manner that additionally pays 20,000 won per month to the members with the back number.
On December 20, 2014, the Defendant received KRW 20 million from the members of the fraternity in relation to the above number guidance at a non-permanent place on the same day, and thus, the Defendant was obligated to pay KRW 23.6 million to the victim B, which is the cause of the 19th fraternity, designated as the recipient of the above number guidance, and around January 20, 2015, the Defendant was obligated to pay KRW 23.8 million to the same victim B, which is the cause of the 20th fraternity in the same manner.
Nevertheless, the Defendant violated his duties on January 20, 2015, and did not pay the victim a total of KRW 47,400,000,000 for the Defendant’s personal debt and living expenses. At around that time, the Defendant arbitrarily consumed the Defendant’s personal debt and living expenses.
2. The Defendant in breach of trust related to the 30 million won foot No. 1 to December 2014 is the owner who operated the 30 million won foot No. 10,000 won unit per unit from November 2014 to December 2014. The above number No. 30,000 won unit per unit is operated in a manner that additionally pays 60,000 won per month to the members with the back number.
By December 2014, the Defendant was paid KRW 12 million from the victim B in relation to the above number guidance, but the above guidance was sold around January 2015, and thus, the Defendant was unable to operate the above guidance, so there was a duty to refund the payment to the victim.
Nevertheless, the defendant violated his duty on January 2015 and did not pay a total of KRW 12 million to the victim, and around that time, consumed the defendant's personal debt and living expenses for him.