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

Punishment of the crime

On March 16, 2016, the Defendant entered into a consignment contract with the victim B, a manufacturer and seller of new combustion, etc. to sell them on consignment and pay a fee according to the sales amount. The Defendant is a person who sells new shoes at D stores in Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government C department stores and has worked as a manager in charge of inventory management and store in general.

From March 16, 2016 to April 8, 2018, the Defendant: (a) was entrusted by the victim with the sale of new shoes and kept them in custody for business purposes; (b) was required to repay the repayment for the personal debt; (c) from March 16, 2016 to April 2018, the Defendant arbitrarily consumed 432 units (total market price of 78,485,00 won) of the victim company’s new shares by means of selling the new shares of the victim company between March 16, 2016 and April 2018 by using the proceeds in cash without registering sale.

Summary of Evidence

1. Partial statement of the defendant;

1. Legal statement of witness E;

1. A protocol of examination of part of the defendant by prosecution;

1. Statement to E by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint, certificate, and person, sales agency contract, the current status of receipt and payment of inventory, and B stored electronic data;

1. Articles 356 and 355 (1) of the Criminal Act applicable to the facts constituting an offense;

1. Determination of the defendant and defense counsel's assertion of alternative imprisonment with labor

1. Of the 432 parts destroyed by the defendant's burial, the embezzlement is limited to 80 parts, and the remainder is not embezzled even if it was lost due to the defendant's fault in inventory management.

2. The Defendant asserts that, while running a business for a two-year period, the failure in inventory management caused the loss of 352 satisfaction. However, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by this court, namely, the Defendant’s store is a store in the department store where the management system, such as CCTV, is well equipped, and the end of March 2018.