A defendant shall be punished by imprisonment for six months.

Punishment of the crime

The defendant is the representative director of corporation B established for the purpose of vessel leasing business, shipping brokerage business, etc., and the victim C is a person who engages in vessel leasing business under the trade name of "D."

On September 2016, the Defendant: (a) arranged a vessel lease agreement with a lessor or a corporation F as a lessee with respect to the “E” of a vessel owned by the victim (hereinafter “instant vessel”); and (b) subsequently, due to the nonperformance of the lessee F Co., Ltd., G corporation succeeded to the lessee status.

Around March 2017, the Defendant entered into an agreement with G Co., Ltd., a successor, to pay KRW 94,520,000 to the victim the remainder after deducting commission 33,438,500 from commission.

On May 11, 2017, the Defendant received KRW 94,520,00 from G Co., Ltd. for the instant vessel rent of KRW 33,438,50, and embezzled KRW 61,081,50, which is the remainder of the amount obtained by deducting the commission of the Defendant, from the commission of the Defendant.

Summary of Evidence

1. Defendant's legal statement;

1. Statement to C by the police;

1. Application of Acts and subordinate statutes on ship lease contracts and a detailed statement of bank transactions;

1. Relevant Articles of the Criminal Act and reasons for sentencing under Article 355 (1) of the Criminal Act for the choice of criminal facts;

1. The scope of punishment by law: Imprisonment for one to five years;

2. The scope of recommendations according to the sentencing guidelines [decision of types] the scope of embezzlement and breach of trust [type 1] the scope of embezzlement and breach of trust [no special person] below 10 million won [no person] [the scope of recommendations and recommendations], the basic area and the scope of recommendations], and April through April 14 months.

3. Determination of sentence: Imprisonment with prison labor for six months is inevitable because the defendant has not been able to suffer any damage to the victim until now. However, the statutory detention should not be made in consideration of the fact that the defendant was the first offender and is going against the crime of this case and is compensating for the damage to the victim.