A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for up to six 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

On December 26, 2016, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement with the victim C (owner) and D E-car as of the lease period of 60 months, lease fees of 1,842,763 won per month, and the Defendant received the said vehicle and kept it for the victim.

Nevertheless, around July 2017, the Defendant received from F a bond company F a refund of the Defendant’s franchiser car amounting to KRW 18 million, and provided the said D car as security. From August 2017 to August 2017, the Defendant refused to return the instant vehicle and embezzled the said car amounting to KRW 101,200,000 at the market price, even if the Defendant received a request from the victim to “the lease fee was not paid.”

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. G statements;

1. Application of financial application, D Operation Lease Agreements, contract confirmations, receipts, and register of automobiles Acts and subordinate statutes;

1. Relevant Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act (The following extenuating circumstances among the reasons for sentencing);

1. Reasons for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act [the scope of recommending punishment] Type 2 (10 million won or more to 50 million won) (6-2 years) (special mitigation) in the mitigated area (6-2 years), actual pressure, etc. [Pronouncement of sentence] In addition, regardless of six months of imprisonment and two years of suspended sentence, damage companies suffered considerable damage by taking part in the act of leaving leased vehicles as security to others.

The damage was not recovered because the vehicle's location was not found.

However, it is against the defendant's wrong recognition.

There is no criminal record of the same kind.

Examining the circumstances of the case, this is considered in light of the following circumstances: (a) there is a circumstance in which the defendant deceptions from H, etc. and leads the defendant to the vehicle; and (b) the defendant does not seem to have made any direct profit through the crime.

The above circumstances and other defendants.