A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

On July 17, 2013, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement between the victim Hyundai Capital Co., Ltd. and the victim company with respect to the Dbenz C220 car owned by the victim company at the entire market located in Gangnam-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter “Seoul”) around July 17, 2013, and received the said car around July 20, 2013.

While the Defendant kept the said car on behalf of the victim company, on July 20, 2013, the Defendant borrowed KRW 20 million from the non-registered bond company around July 20, 2013, and transferred the said car for the purpose of collateral security.

Accordingly, the Defendant embezzled the car owned by the victim company.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police for E;

1. An application for lease of modern capital vehicles;

1. A certified copy of the motor vehicle registration ledger;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to an investigation report (verification of the F human resources of a witness);

1. Relevant Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the facts constituting an offense and Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act selecting a penalty;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the suspended execution;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2(1) of the Criminal Act and Article 59 of the Act on the Observation, etc. of Protection, etc. of Social Service Order is that the Defendant arbitrarily transferred the leased vehicles of the victim company and embezzled the same is not good.

However, the sentence was determined by comprehensively taking into account the following factors: (a) there are circumstances to consider the transfer of the leased vehicle; (b) the confession and reflection of the defendant's crime; (c) the defendant's age, sexual conduct; (d) the circumstances after the crime; and (e) various sentencing conditions shown in the changed theory.

It is so decided as per Disposition for the above reasons.