A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for one year from the date this judgment becomes final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant, from April 2010 to January 3, 2019, was operating the Ship Parts Manufacturing Business Co., Ltd (hereinafter referred to as “C”) in Kimhae-si B.

On January 3, 2019, the Defendant: (a) transferred all of the business operations, including the above C’s office and machinery and equipment, to the victim E Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “victim”) operated by D; (b) around that time, between F and F, an employee of the victimized Company; (c) the Defendant agreed to make and process the damaged Company’s products that C had already received orders from the Customer G Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “G”) prior to the transfer of the above business, and supplied them to G, the Defendant received the prices of the products from

Accordingly, based on the above, the F was handed over the raw materials equivalent to KRW 7,351,190, which the Defendant purchased from the Defendant in advance, and based on this, the F produced and processed the total amount of KRW 27,843,101, from January 25, 2019 to March 4, 2019, and supplied them to G.

Nevertheless, around February 25, 2019, the Defendant received KRW 45,304,162 from G to the corporate account under the name of C, and subsequently voluntarily consumed KRW 20,492,021, excluding the above raw material price of KRW 7,351,190, out of KRW 27,843,101, the Defendant kept for the said victimized company the remainder of KRW 20,492,021 for the said victimized company, without paying it to the victimized company.

Accordingly, the Defendant embezzled the property of the victimized company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. The police statement concerning F;

1. A complaint and accompanying documents;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes for investigation reporting;

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

1. Although it cannot be deemed that the amount of embezzlement for the reason of sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act is less than the amount, the defendant's mistake is recognized and there are circumstances that can be taken into account the circumstances of the crime, there is no same criminal record, and there is no other kind of agreement with the victim, and the defendant's age, character and conduct.