A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is a person who had been operating a manufacturer company under the trade name of C in Si interest city B.

On December 3, 2008, the Defendant took out a loan of KRW 200 million from the funds for small and medium enterprise facilities at the center of the victim's exclusive Industrial Bank of Korea located in Geumcheon-gu, Geumcheon-gu, Seoul, Seoul on November 25, 2016, and offered a security for transfer to the Defendant's criminal smuggling one (HMT-1100) and one (SIRIUS-850) for the money for the above small and medium enterprise facilities until the full payment of the funds for the above small and medium enterprise facilities was made. As such, the Defendant had a duty to keep the said machinery for the purpose of security until the said bank pays its debts as a good manager and not dispose of it at will.

Nevertheless, on December 2010, the Defendant violated his duties, and transferred each of the aforementioned mechanical devices to a seller of fixed machinery among the above mechanical devices in excess of KRW 120 million and KRW 15 million among the patrolmen on May 201, 201.

As a result, the Defendant acquired property benefits equivalent to KRW 135 million in sum of the market price of the above 2 machinery, and suffered damage equivalent to the same amount to the injured bank.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Police suspect interrogation protocol of the accused;

1. Statement made to D by the police;

1. The table of calculation of statement of claims, a credit transaction agreement, a transfer for security, and a list of transfer for security;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (Evidence records 17 pages);

1. Taking into account the relevant legal provisions as to criminal facts and the selection of punishment under Article 355(2) and Article 355(1) of the Criminal Act (the point of breach of trust and the choice of imprisonment), the amount of damage of this case and the fact that the damage was not recovered. It is so decided as per Disposition