A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for 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

Victim B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “victim B”) is a corporation established for the purpose of software development and wholesale and retail sale, etc., and the Defendant is a person who works as the head of the Victim’s Planning and Marketing Team leader from October 29, 2007 to November 10, 2008 and has been engaged in overall management of the construction of contracts and sites with external companies related to the web hard business promoted by the Victim Company.

The defendant, while in office in a victim company, has a duty to conclude a contract with an external company, such as a software company, to make the most beneficial interest in the victim company and to transfer the benefit therefrom to the victim company.

Nevertheless, the Defendant, in violation of his duties, concluded a contract with an external company to make the victim company pay the service price excessively appropriated for the external company, and agreed to pay the difference again from the external company to be used for personal consumption. On November 22, 2007, the Defendant entered into a contract with D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) for the supply of web sod and club-type web sod and it is necessary to use it for D operators E in cash. If it is necessary to use it for its business, the Defendant requested KRW 30 million under the so-called “Yeman”, and agreed to request KRW 70 million including the above KRW 30 million,000,000,000,000 for E and the above service price.

Accordingly, on November 23, 2007, the victim company paid to D KRW 38.5 million under the name of gold, and KRW 38.5 million under the remaining name of January 10, 2008, and KRW 77 million in total.

As a result, the Defendant violated his duties, thereby having D obtain approximately KRW 30 million, which is the difference between ordinary service values, from the victim company, and caused damages equivalent to the same amount to the victim company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The defendant;