Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 2,000,000.

When the defendant does not pay the above fine, 100,000 won.

Punishment of the crime

On April 18, 2013, the Defendant: (a) concluded a lease agreement for riding, with the name influent employees of an agricultural cooperative of the victim’s nautical miles from the “agricultural cooperative of the nautical miles” office located at the center of the 72 nautical miles from North Korea, on April 18, 2013; (b) the Defendant leased a 21,140,000 rental fee from the damaged person during five years from April 18, 2013 to April 17, 2018; and (c) the Defendant, upon the expiration of the lease period, fully pays the above rental fee and KRW 2,350,00 to the injured person, if he/she pays the said fee and KRW 2,350,000 to the injured person, on the part

Accordingly, while the Defendant received from the injured party of the same day the PZ63G boarding flag (B) equivalent to KRW 23,490,000, the market price of the victim owned by the same day, and kept the victim for the victim, the Defendant arbitrarily sold the e-mail 10,000,000 to employees in the “C” located at the early Kim Jong-si on November 201, 204.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to contracts for the lease of agricultural machinery, photographs of mags, specifications of transactions of mags, records of Egyms;

1. Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act and Article 355 of the same Act concerning the crime, the selection of fines;

1. Article 70(1) and Article 69(2) of the Criminal Act to attract a workhouse;

1. The crime of this case committed by the Defendant on the ground of sentencing of Article 334(1) of the Criminal Procedure Act on the Aggravated Punishment of the Aggravated Punishment Order is not appropriate.

However, there are extenuating circumstances that can be considered favorable to the defendant, such as the fact that the defendant misleads and reflects his mistake, and that the defendant made a disposition contrary to the purpose of the storage of the agricultural machinery, but until that time, he paid the victim the difference, that there was an agreement to pay part of the money to the victim during the investigation process and to pay the remaining money in installments, and that there was no criminal history.