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

Punishment of the crime

From around April 17, 2014 to April 17, 2016, the Defendant served as the head of the office in the “E”, which is a wholesale company for fishery products D located in Jung-gu Incheon Metropolitan City operated by the victim C, and was engaged in the business of managing customers and selling proceeds.

Around December 9, 2014, the Defendant received KRW 500,000 from F, a business partner, to the Suhyup account in the name of the Defendant’s name for sales proceeds, and received KRW 500,000 on behalf of the victim, and was in the course of business for the victim. Around that time, the Defendant used KRW 500,000 in total for 50 times from the above day to April 16, 2016, as indicated in the list of crimes in the separate list of crimes, from the above day to the day of April 16, 2016, the Defendant used KRW 61,058,00 in total for multi-stage remittance and living expenses.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Part concerning the statement of C and H in the police interrogation protocol against the accused;

1. Statement made by the police against C;

1. Investigation report (determined report on the amount of damage);

1. Details of each account transaction, application of the Acts and subordinate statutes of each customer partner;

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

1. The grounds for sentencing under the former part of Article 37, Article 38(1)2, and Article 50 of the Criminal Act for the aggravation of concurrent crimes [the scope of recommending punishment] No basic area (from April to January 14) (the scope of sentencing less than 100 million won) (no person subject to special sentencing] (the decision of sentencing) is previous and the defendant is in conflict with each other.

However, it seems that the defendant embezzled a considerable amount of money over a considerable period of time by reflecting the trust of the victim, and the damage suffered by the victim in addition to the above damage amount seems to be considerable.

Nevertheless, the defendant did not pay damages or agree with the victim.

In addition, the amount embezzled by the defendant is invested in entertainment expenses or multi-level businesses not only for the maintenance of livelihood, but also after the crime is committed.