The punishment of the accused shall be set forth in six months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The victim tin shop company is a company that engages in the precious metal wholesale and retail business, and the defendant is a person who has been engaged in the sales and management of goods at the precious metal sales store operated by the victim from around February 2001 to February 4, 2013 at the D department store located in Gwangju-gu, Gwangju-gu, in the name of "E" at the D department store in Gwangju-gu.

1. Around December 2012, the Defendant: (a) sold in cash the Damond (0.50cc/t, F/VS1) owned by the victim company to F; (b) sold the Damond in cash to F; and (c) embezzled the proceeds for personal purposes around that time while being kept in custody for the victim company.

2. Around January 2013, the Defendant borrowed 2 million won from the nominal owner of “G” located in the vicinity of the foregoing D department store, and embezzled it as collateral by offering 3 Damond (each of 0.69c/t F/S1, 00c/S1, 0.50c/SI2, 0.71c/S1c/S1) equivalent to the market value of the victim’s possession as the collateral.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Entry of each protocol of examination of the accused by the prosecution (2 and 3 times);

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes entered in the police statement of H and I (three times);

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

1. Of concurrent crimes, the former part of Article 37, Articles 38 (1) 2 and 50 of the Criminal Act;

1. Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 62(1) of the suspended sentence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da15488, Apr. 1, 2009) provides that the Defendant’s assertion and determination on the above assertion shall be made by the Defendant, as stated in the facts of the crime, that the Defendant sold the Damond to the victim at will or borrowed money from others as security. However, the Damond sold before the complaint