Defendant

Wornasium (prosecution), Kim Jong- or public trial

Attorney Yoon Jae-sung (Korean)

A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

However, the execution of the above punishment shall be suspended for two years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

To order the accused to provide community service for 160 hours.

From October 21, 2004 to December 5, 2014, the Defendant worked as the representative director of the victim non-indicted 2 corporation located in Ansan-si ( Address 2 omitted), and as the representative director of the victim non-indicted 3 corporation from December 3, 2008 to December 3, 2015, respectively, while working as the actual representative director of the victim non-indicted 3 corporation, and had the victim company keep the funds owned by the victim company for its business purposes.

On June 6, 2009, the Defendant attempted to purchase the Defendant’s wife and Nonindicted 1, the representative director in the name of the victim Nonindicted 3 Co. 3’s non-indicted 1, in the name of the Defendant, but was short of the funds, the Defendant was able to withdraw the money owned by the victimized company and raise the housing purchase fund.

On November 27, 2009, the Defendant embezzled the total amount of KRW 479,615,000, which is owned by the victimized company 9 times in total as shown in the attached list of crimes, using the Defendant’s housing purchase fund from the △△ Bank account (Account Number 2 omitted) in the name of Nonindicted Co. 3 in the name of the victim Nonindicted Co. 3 (Account Number 2 omitted) to the above Nonindicted Co. 1’s account (Account Number: Account Number 3 omitted). In addition, the Defendant embezzled the above amount of KRW 253,60,00 from June 4, 2009 to December 24, 2009, by using the Defendant’s housing purchase fund.

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Copy of the corporate register (foreign corporation, non-indicted 3);

1. A certified real estate register;

1. Report of investigation (report on the result of execution of a warrant for search, seizure, and inspection), embezzlement, and date and time of return;

1. Investigation report (report on the result of execution of warrant issued by the account holder 1) and details of account transactions;

1. Article relevant to the facts constituting an offense and the selection of punishment;

Articles 356 and 355(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Aggravation for concurrent crimes;

Article 37 (former part), Article 38 (1) 2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act

1. Suspension of execution;

Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act

1. Social service order;

Article 62-2 of the Criminal Act

【Scope of Recommendation】

Type 2 (1000 to less than 500), basic area (1 to 3 years)

【Special Convicted Persons】

None

【Determination of Sentence】

The amount equivalent to the damage amount was paid to each victim and the damage was recovered. The crime of this case is that the defendant used the corporation as his own wall to prepare apartment sale price, thereby undermining the transparency in the management of the company, thereby undermining the credibility in the economic system, and causing the loss to the parties to the company. In addition, considering the fact that the defendant did not have any criminal record identical to or heavier than that of the defendant.

[Attachment]

Judges Adjusted