A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for not less than eight months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant was the father F (Death around February 2012) of E (the 60 years of age, women) registered as the representative director of the wife population D (the 60 years of age, women) in Gyeonggi-do, and was working for the above company as the husband F (Death around February 2012).

On November 15, 2007, the Defendant entered into a lease agreement on the lease amount of KRW 48,859,915, and the lease period from December 20, 2007 to November 20, 2010, on the condition that the Defendant would pay KRW 1,13,00,00 as the monthly rent, at a modern automobile Young-dong 4, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul Metropolitan Government, 94-1 SamsungBCF, under the name of the above E.

The Defendant, under a lease agreement, was keeping the said vehicle with the network F while operating the said vehicle that the owner became the victim. On December 24, 2008, the Defendant sold the said vehicle to the person in poor name.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of the witness H;

1. Each prosecutor's statement to I and J;

1. Copy of the automobile facility rental contract, the automobile register, and the details of the receipt of principal and interest on disposable discrimination;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to investigation reports (report on attachment to documents by reference witness J, such as motor vehicle registration certificate);

1. Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the crimes;

1. Grounds for conviction and sentencing under Article 62 (1) of the Criminal Act;

1. As acknowledged by the above evidence, in full view of the fact that the defendant issued a certificate of personal seal impression and a certificate of sales contract under the name of the defendant to the purchaser of the above vehicle and sent it to the defendant a certificate of contents demanding the purchaser to purchase the vehicle again, it is reasonable to deem that the defendant sold the above vehicle while keeping the vehicle. On the other hand, the defendant sold the above vehicle to the F, while gathering the circumstances.