A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

From the beginning of September 2014 to the middle of December 2015, the Defendant served as the head of the management department requesting packaging and selective distribution of the goods requested by the clothing company to be kept at the above logistics center in D located in Gyeonggi-si, Gyeonggi-si, the first half of December 2015.

On November 1, 2015, the Defendant: (a) around 14:00, around 14:00, and around 14:68 of the garment Manufacturing Business Co., Ltd., which the victim E is the representative director, committed a theft by putting in six strings and one strings of vinyl F, which are the victim-owned (the victim-owned KRW 99,000 per occupation), 208 of test color strings (the 159,000 per occupation), and 280 of color strings (the 159,000 won per occupation), all market prices, including 84,324,000 won per occupation).

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. A protocol concerning the examination of suspects of G to the prosecution;

1. Copy of each protocol concerning the examination of suspect of the police to H and I;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the respective police statements made to E, J and K;

1. Relevant Article 329 of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. Reasons for the sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act / [the scope of recommending the sentencing] / [the scope of recommending the sentencing] / [the person subject to special mitigation / [whether or not a suspended sentence has been suspended / The main reason : there is no positive criminal punishment for living : No positive social relation / there is no positive social relation, serious reflectivity (decision of a sentence] : It is not agreed with the victim, but it appears that most of the damaged items were seized and returned to the victim, and other factors such as the degree of damage, the circumstances leading to the crime, and the character and conduct of the defendant should be additionally considered.