A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for one year.

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

Punishment of the crime

From January 2009, the Defendant, as the representative director of the victim D Co., Ltd., took charge of management such as the management of the victim’s property.

The Defendant, from March 2010 to March 2010, during the process of the construction of “E” in the Seoul subway that was subcontracted by the victim from the KT, received part of the construction cost paid by the victim to the said business Communications, the subcontractor, and the said business Communications is deemed to have been refunded.

7. On the 17th of the same month, the Defendant transferred 297 million won to the Republic of Korea, a new bank account of the Defendant, to the Republic of Korea, which is a subcontractor, after deducting 27 million won equivalent to the value added tax, from the said amount. On the 17th of the same month, the remittance of KRW 130 million to the Korean bank account of the Defendant, and KRW 140 million to the new bank account of the Defendant, thereby having the Defendant keep the said amount in custody in the course of business to return the said amount to the victim.

Defendant 270 million won, which was the victim’s possession as above, was embezzled by either appropriating for the repayment of his/her debt to the victim or by consuming for living expenses, etc. around the same time.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement of F in the protocol of interrogation of the suspect against the accused by the prosecution (one-time) ;

1. Statement made by the police with regard to F;

1. Application of the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes on account transactions in each bank account under the name of the recipient;

1. Relevant legal provisions of the Criminal Act and Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act concerning the choice of criminal facts;

1. Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act on the stay of execution (The following circumstances considered in favor of the reasons for sentencing);

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62-2 of the Social Service Order Criminal Act is that the defendant, as the representative director of the victim company, freely misappropriated the company's funds as if he were personal funds by taking advantage of his status as the representative director, and the size of embezzlement is not large. Thus, the defendant's principal crime is not minor.

However, the defendant is in profoundly against his mistake while making a confession of crime, and is in the same kind.