A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four 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

On August 8, 2012, the Defendant: (a) entrusted 100 games 10,000 won purchased by the victim C from the sales business entity of an infinite game; (b) installed 40 games 10,000 won in Gangwon-si; and (c) installed 60,000 won in the head of the Daejeon-si Game near Daejeon-si, the Defendant agreed to pay 6,00,000 won to the victim each month by receiving profits from the female owners.

In October 2012, the Defendant sold a 40 game machine installed in the original game room with the permission of the victim because the operation of the game room is difficult, and used the 60 game machine remaining in the cost of re-establishment of the program. Nevertheless, the victim demanded the return of the proceeds after he disposed of all the 60 game machine.

On October 2012, the Defendant sold the above game machine 60 million won to a game room business operator whose name is unknown, and embezzled the money by using it as a means of debt repayment, etc. while being kept for the victim.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. The legal statement of the witness C;

1. Each letter of certification;

1. Application of the Acts and subordinate statutes to the complaint;

1. Relevant Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act, the choice of punishment for the crime, and the choice of imprisonment;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the suspended sentence under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act [the scope of the recommended sentence] Class 1 of the mitigated area (one hundred million won or less) [one month or October] [the person subject to special mitigation] of punishment, or a case where significant damage was restored [the decision of the sentenced sentence] that resulted in the Defendant’s misappropriation of personal trust and embezzlement of this case should be subject to criticism and that full damage was not repaid. In light of the fact that the Defendant’s misappropriation of personal trust and the Defendant’s misappropriation

However, there is no actual criminal punishment of the defendant, and the victim does not want the punishment of the defendant by agreement with the victim.