A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not more than ten months.

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

(e).

Punishment of the crime

On October 23, 2015, the Defendant entered into a sales contract with the victim C Co., Ltd. to reserve ownership of KRW 476,184,500 for equipment, such as C Co., Ltd., and C Co., Ltd., and C Co., Ltd., and C Co., Ltd., and C Co., Ltd., and C Co., Ltd., and C Co., Ltd., for use and profit-making of the equipment reserved

On October 19, 2016, the Defendant embezzled by setting up a collateral security of KRW 300,000,000 for the amount of the claim and the maximum amount of the claim, which was entered into a sales contract for the reservation of ownership with the victim when taking land, buildings, and machinery belonging to the factories of the above B Co., Ltd. as collateral with the victim in Gangnam-gu Seoul and E.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Each legal statement of witness F, G and H in each part;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of partially the accused by the prosecution;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on a certificate for all registered matters and a contract for goods purchase;

1. Relevant Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence of the Criminal Act [the scope of the recommended sentence] Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution [the grounds for sentencing [the scope of the recommended sentence] Article 62(2) of the Act on the Special Mitigation Area (3 to 500 million won) [the special mitigated person] In the case where the risk of damage is not significantly realized, and a significant damage has been recovered (the decision of sentencing] in the case where the victim company against the corporation E in the lawsuit for cancellation of the right of retention against the corporation E, the victim company won in favor of the victim company as the confession of the corporation E. In the lawsuit for delivery of corporeal movable property against the defendant management company, the defendant company was finally

Defendant

In addition, the issue of the price of movable property or damages with the operating company is separate from the issue of whether the victim suffered losses due to the embezzlement of this case.

It is difficult to see it.

The defendant's counter-performance and crime.