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

On April 9, 2013, the Defendant: (a) decided to share the apartment purchase business at the Taesle hotel coffee shop located in Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 4-dong on the distribution of Seocho-gu, Seoul; (b) presented that “The Defendant has money to other partners C in order to proceed with the apartment purchase business.” (c) around 30 million won, the Defendant was issued KRW 30 million from the victim as “in order to create a passbook deposited in the amount of KRW 5 billion through D through the bond company D.” (d) and was issued by the victim.

The Defendant, on the same day, delivered KRW 30 million to the “Egy”, a partner of the bond company D, but on April 10, 2013, the victim said that he/she would no longer continue to conduct his/her business, and received a return of the said KRW 30 million from the “Egy” on April 11, 2013, and thus, he/she arbitrarily consumed the said money by using the said money as his/her marriage fund from the members of the Seoul Si Council around that time.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. A protocol concerning the suspect examination of the accused;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on police statement No. B

1. Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. Grounds for sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. Scope of the sentence recommended by the sentencing guidelines [decision of type] Embezzlement Embezzlement (decision of less than 100 million won) [decision of the recommended area] mitigated area (decision of the recommended area] - mitigated area (decision of the recommended area] - 10 months;

2. In light of the fact that the Defendant committed the instant crime in the course of being tried due to fraud, etc., and that the damage is not easy, a punishment should be strictly imposed against the Defendant. However, considering the fact that the Defendant is led to confession and reflect, a significant amount of damage has been recovered and the victim does not want the punishment of the Defendant, and the sentencing conditions stipulated in Article 51 of the Criminal Act have been considered, the sentence shall be determined as ordered in