A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for four months.

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

Punishment of the crime

The Defendant is a trade name “C”, and the victim D is a person who engages in a mid-term equipment leasing business, respectively, with the trade name “E,” and the Defendant has lent equipment owned by the victim to the scene and received a fee from the victim at the site.

On August 4, 2015, the Defendant leased equipment of eight tons owned by the victim to H “H” and received a lease fee of 600,000 won from the G workplace located in Ulsan-gu, Ulsan-gu, Seoul-do, and kept it for the victim. At that time, the Defendant arbitrarily used the equipment at the expense of the victim from around June 17, 2016 to around June 29, 2016, and received a lease fee of 10,400,000 won in total from around 29 times, as shown in the list of crimes in the attached Table.

Accordingly, the defendant embezzled the victim's property.

Summary of Evidence

1. Statement by the defendant in court;

1. Statement made by the police against D;

1. Complaint;

1. Details of transactions, application of the Acts and subordinate statutes on the allocation of heavy equipment;

1. Relevant Article 355 of the Criminal Act and Article 355 of the Criminal Act and the choice of punishment for the crime;

1. The reason for sentencing under Article 62(1) of the Act on the Suspension of Execution (hereinafter “the reason for sentencing”), [the scope of the recommended punishment according to the sentencing guidelines] under Article 62(1) of the Criminal Act (hereinafter “the reason for sentencing”), basic area (from April to January 1): The scope of the sentence under the law, in which no special person has been sentenced: January to be sentenced: January to five years [the sentence] of the crime of this case is embezzled by using the equipment owned by the Defendant while the Defendant lent the equipment owned by the victim to the site and received the rental fee, and then embezzled it at his own discretion, and the nature and criminality of the crime are not good; damage from the crime of this case is not significant; and there is no agreement with the victim or no damage has been restored until now, and the liability for the crime is less unfavorable to the Defendant.

However, the defendant's mistake is recognized and against his own fault, and at the time the defendant receives the cost of equipment from the customer.